UC-NRLF 


UTwks  TO  m^^mML  HISTORY  AND  PHILOLOGY 
No.  VII. 


gl  Ctitkd  ^%(xmxK(xtiori 


OF  THE 


^t\Ui<K  (P^pon  of  i^t  (gooa  of  Sjra 


BY 


CHARLES  ARTHUR  HAWLEY,  S.T.M. 


! 


SUBMITTED  IN  PARTIAL  FULFILMENT 

OF  THE  REQUIREMENTS  FOR  THE  DEGREE  OF  DOCTOR 

OF  PHILOSOPHY,  IN  THE  FACULTY  OF  PHILOSOPHY, 

COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 


1922 


A  CRITICAL  EXAMINATION 


OF  THE 


PESHITTA  VERSION  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  EZRA 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 
SALES  AGENTS 

NEW  YORK 
LEMCKE  &  BUECHNER 
30-32  EAST  20TH  STREET 

LONDON 

HUMPHREY  MILFORD 
AMEN  CORNER,  E.G. 

^      SHANGHAI 

EDWARD  EVANS  &  SONS,  Ltd. 
30  NORTH  SZECHUEN  ROAD 


CONTRIBUTIONS  TO  ORIENTAL  HISTORY  AND  PHILOLOGY 

No.  VII. 


@l  Cxiimi  ^^cmxicixQXi 


OF  THE 


^t\^\it<x  (P^tpon  of  i^t  (gooR  of  %a 


BY 


CHARLES  ARTHUR  HAWLEY,  S.T.M. 


r 


•\\ 


SUBMITTED  IN  PARTIAL  FULFILMENT 

OF  THE  REQUIREMENTS  FOR  THE  DEGREE  OF  DOCTOR 

OF  PHILOSOPHY,  IN  THE  FACULTY  OF  PHILOSOPHY, 

COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY 


(Tlew  'Sofft 

COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 
1922 


Printed  by  W.  Drugulin,  Leipzig. 


TO  MY  HONORED  TEACHER 

Professor  JULIUS  A.  BEWER,  Ph.  D.,  D.  Theol. 

IN  GRATITUDE 

FOR  HIS  INSPIRING  TEACHING,  WISE 

COUNSEL  AND  TRUE  FRIENDSHIP. 


51741)6 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2007  with  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/criticalexaniinatOOhawlrich 


NOTE 

The  present  Study  of  the  Peshitta  text  of  the  Book  of  Ezra 
fills  a  lacuna  in  the  literature  devoted  to  that  translation  of  the 
Old  Testament  Whether  we  agree  or  not  with  the  conclusions 
reached  by  Dr.  Hawley,  everyone  who  reads  the  following  pages 
must  feel  certain  that  he  has  gone  deeply  into  the  subject  and 
has  made  use  of  all  the  material  that  is  available. 

Columbia  University  Richard  GottheiL 

1922. 


PREFACE 

This  dissertation  is  the  outcome  of  an  investigation  begun 
during  postgraduate  work  in  Union  Theological  Seminary  in 
a  Seminar  conducted  by  Professor  Julius  A.  Bewer.  After 
reviewing  the  adverse  criticisms  of  the  scholars  concerning 
the  Peshitta  Text  of  the  Book  of  Ezra,  and  then  carefully 
studying  the  Peshitta  itself,  I  found  that  the  value  of  the 
latter  for  textual  criticism  had  been  considerably  under- 
estimated and  as  a  result  almost  entirely  neglected.  During 
further  postgraduate  study  at  the  University  of  Basel,  I  con- 
tinued my  study  of  the  Ezra  text.  Finally,  during  the  summer 
semester  of  1922  at  the  University  of  Halle- Wittenberg,  I 
brought  this  work  to  the  point  where  I  offer  my  investiga- 
tions to  the  public. 

I  take  this  opportunity  gratefully  to  acknowledge  my  in- 
debtedness to  Professor  Richard  J.  H.  Gottheil,  and  to  Dr.  Fred- 
erick Vanderburgh  of  Columbia  University;  to  Professors 
Fagnani  and  Henry  Preserved  Smith  of  Union  Theological 
Seminary;  and  to  Professors  Duhm,  Alt,  Wernle,  and  the 
late  Friedrich  Schulthess  of  the  University  of  Basel;  and  to 
Professors  Gunkel,  Brockelmann,  Bauer,  and  Dr.  Hempel  of 
the  University  of  Halle- Wittenberg.  To  Professor  Bauer  of 
Halle  and  to  Professor  Budde  of  Marburg  I  express  deep 
appreciation  for  valuable  assistance  given  me  in  reading  the 
proof.     I   gratefully   acknowledge   my    special   indebtedness 


X  PREFACE 

to  Professor  Julius  A.  Bewer  of  Union  Theological  Seminary 
under  whose  sympathetic  direction  and  inspiration  I  have 
done  all  my  work. 

University  of  Halle- Wittenberg  in  August  1922. 

CHARLES  ARTHUR  HAWLEY. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Barnes,  W.  E.,  Peshitta  Text  of  Chronicles  (Camb.  Univ.  Press,   1897). 

Batten,  L.  W.,  Ezra-Nehemiah  (New  York,  1913). 

Bertholet,  a.,  Esra  und  Nehemia  (Tiibingen,  1902). 

Bewer,  J.  A.,  Der  Text  des  Baches  Ezra  (Gottingen,  1922). 

Bloch,  Joshua,   A  Critical  Examination  of  the  Text  of  the  Syriac  Version 

of  the  Song  of  Songs.     AJSL,  1922. 
Buhl,  F.,  Canon  and  Text  of  the  Old  Testament  (Edinburgh,  1894). 
Burkitt,  F,  C,  Article  "Text  and  Versions",  Ency.  Biblica. 
CoRNiLL,  C.  H.,   Einleitung  in  das  Alte  Testament  (Tiibingen,  1913).     Das 

Buch  des  Propheten  Ezechiel  (Leipzig,  1886). 
Davies,  T.  W.,  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  and  Esther  (New  York,  1909). 
DuHM,  B.,  Die  Psalmen  (Tiibingen,  1922). 
Duval,  R,,  La  Litt^rature  Syriaque  (Paris,  1907). 

Guthe,  The  Books  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  (Leipzig  and  New  York,  1901). 
Klostermann,  a.,  Geschichte  des  Volkes  Israel  (Miinchen,  1896). 
Meyer,  Ed.,  Die  Entstehung  des  Judenthums  (Halle,  1896). 
Nestle,  E.,  Bibeliibersetzungen  (Syrische  Ubersetzungen)  PRE  III. 
NoLDEKE,  Theodor,  Die  Alttestamentliche  Literatur  (Leipzig,  1868). 
Rahlfs,  Beitrage  zur  Textkritik  der  Peschitta  ZATW  1889. 
Siegfried,  D.  C,  Esra,  Nehemia,  und  Esther  (Gottingen,  1901). 
Steuernagel,  C,  Einleitung  in  das  Alte  Testament  (Tubingen,  1912). 
Swete,  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament  in  Greek  (Cambridge,  19 14). 
Torrey,  C,  Ezra  Studies  (Chicago,  1910). 
Wellhausen,  J.,  Text  der  Bucher  Samuelis  (Gottingen,  1871). 
Wright,  W.,  A  Short  History  of  Syriac  Literature  (London  1894).     The 

Homilies  of  Aphraates  (London,  1869). 


ABBREVIATIONS 

AJSL,  American  Journal  of  Semitic  Languages  and  Literatures. 
BDB,  Brown,  Driver,  Briggs.     Hebrew  Dictionary. 
Esd.,  I  Esdras  Swete,  Old  Testament  in  Greek. 
Esd.  A,  Alexandrian  Codex  of  I  Esdras. 
Esd.B,  Vatican  Codex  of  I  Esdras. 

Esd.  L,  Lagarde's  text  of  I  Esdras  in  "Libri  Veteris  Testamenti  Syriace". 
1861. 
Esd.Syr.j  Syriac  of  I  Esdras,  according  to  Lagarde. 
G  (LXX),  The  Greek  translation,  according  to  Swete's  Edition. 

GA,  Alexandrian  Codex  of  the  Greek  Ezra. 

GB,  Vatican  Codex  of  the  Greek  Ezra. 
GL,  Lagarde's  Edition  of  Ezra. 

MT,  Masoretic  Text. 
Neh.,  Nehemiah. 
PRE,  Realencyclopadie  f.  Prot.  Theol.  u.  Kirche.    3.  Aufl. 

S,  Syriac  (Peshitta). 
Vulg.,  Vulgate. 

L,  Lee's  Edition  of  the  Syriac  Text. 
P,  Paris  Polyglott. 
RV,  American  Revised  Version  (1901). 
U,  Urumia  Edition  of  Syriac  Text. 
W,  London  Polyglott  (Walton). 
ZATW,  Zeitschrift  fiir  alttestamentliche  Wissenschaft 
-f-,  Addition  to  the  text. 


INTRODUCTION. 

The  Bible  of  the  Syriac  Church,  like  that  of  the  Alex- 
andrian (Greek),  was  the  work  of  several  translators  and  was 
made  at  different  times.  After  the  ninth  century,  Syriac  Mss.  of 
the  Old  Testament  generally  went  by  the  name  of  Peshitta. 
The  origin  of  the  Peshitta  lies  in  obscurity.  Internal  evidence 
points  to  characteristics  both  of  Jewish  and  of  Christian 
translators. 

Noldeke*  has  stated  the  facts  in  the  case  as  follows:  *'Sie 
(Peschita)  zeigt,  namentlich  im  Pentateuch,  nicht  blofi  in  der 
Auffassung,  sondern  selbst  in  den  Ausdriicken  eine  ent- 
schiedene  Verwandtschaft  mit  den  Targumen,  theils  mit  den 
officiellen,  theils  mit  den  ubrigen.  Man  hat  deshalb  in  neuerer 
Zeit  auch  die  Peschita  ohne  weiteres  als  eine  judische  Ueber- 
setzung  beanspruchen  wollen,  aber  dagegen  sprechen  doch 
gewichtige  Griinde.  Manche  Stellen  zeigen  in  ihr  eine  ent- 
schiedene  christliche  Auffassung,  zum  Theil  in  Widerspruch 
mit  alien  sonstigen  alten  Uebersetzungen  und  in  einer  Weise, 
die  nicht  durch  nachtragliche  Interpolation  erklart  werden 
kann;  namentlich  finden  sich  solche  Stellen  im  Syrischen 
Psalter.  Ferner  ist  die  Peschita,  soweit  wir  wissen,  nie  von 
Juden  gebraucht  —  der  Verfasser  des  Targums  zu  den 
Spriichen  unterwarf  sie  erst  einer  Umarbeitung  im  jiidischen 
Sinn  — ,   wahrend   sie   stets   bei    alien   christlichen  Parteien 

I  Noldeke,  Die  Alttestantentlicke  Literature  S.  262.  Cf.  also  Buhl,  Canon  and 
Text  of  the  Old  Testament^  p.  186. 

I 


2  INTRODUCTION 

Syriens  als  Kircheniibersetzung  gedient  hat.  Auch  ist  der 
Dialect,  in  dem  sie  abgefasst  ist,  derselbe,  welcher  im 
syrischen  Neuen  Testament  herrscht  und  der  iiberhaupt  die 
Schriftsprache  der  christlichen  Syrer  bildet,  deren  erstes 
Monument  fiir  uns  wenigstens  eben  sie  ist,  wahrend  wir  keine 
jiidischen  Schriften  in  dieser  Mundart  kennen." 

Wright'  similarly  holds  that  the  Peshitta  is  "not  impro- 
bably a  monument  of  the  learning  and  the  zeal  of  the 
Christians  of  Edessa.  Possibly  Jewish  converts,  or  even  Jews, 
took  a  part  in  it,  for  some  books  (such  as  the  Pentateuch 
and  Job)  are  very  literally  rendered  whereas  the  coincidences 
with  the  LXX  (which  are  particularly  numerous  in  the  pro- 
phetical books)  show  the  hand  of  Christian  translators  or  re- 
visers. That  Jews  should  have  had  at  any  rate  a  consultative 
share  in  this  work  need  not  surprise  us,  when  we  remember 
that  Syrian  fathers,  such  as  Aphraates,  in  the  middle  of  the 
fourth  century,  and  Jacob  of  Edessa,  in  the  latter  half  of 
the  seventh,  had  frequent  recourse,  like  Jerome,  to  the 
scholars  of  the  synagogue." 

An  example  of  purely  Jewish  translation  is  pointed  out  by 
Noldeke*:  "Eine  besondere  Stellung  nimmt  aber  die  syrische 
Uebersetzung  der  Chronik  ein.  Diese  ist  allerdings  ein  reines 
Targum.  Sie  zeigt  vielfache  Zusatze,  Umschreibungen  und 
rabbinische  Ausdeutungen:  die  Aengstlichkeit  bei  der  Ver- 
meidung  von  Anthropomorphismen  ist  hier  ganz  wie  in 
den  Targumen.  Den  rein  jiidischen  Character  zeigt  die  Stelle 
I.  Chron.  52,  wo  es  heisst:  "aus  Juda  wird  hervorgehen 
der  Konig  Messias";  wer  diesen  Zusatz  gemacht  hat,  fur 
den  war  doch  Christus  noch  nicht  gekommen.  Bei  diesem 
wenig  gelesenen  Buche  haben  die  Syrer  also  ein  jiidisches 
Targum  arglos  iibernommen." 

1  Wright,  Syrtac  Literature ,  p.  3. 

2  Noldeke,  AL,  S.  263  f. 


INTRODUCTION  3 

The  antiquity  of  the  Peshitta  has  long  been  recognized. 
Noldeke  says:*  "Die  Peschita  ist  wohl  die  alteste  aller  christ- 
lichen  Bibeliibersetzungen.  Bei  der  starken  Ausbreitung  des 
Christentums  in  Syrien  und  Mesopotamien  schon  in  dessen 
friihsten  Zeiten  konnte  man  eines  allgemein  verstandlichen 
Textes  des  damals  noch  allein  als  kanonisch  geltenden  Alten 
Testaments  nicht  lange  entbehren.  Fur  den  heiligen  Ephraim 
(gestorben  373)  ist  die  Peschita  denn  auch  schon  ein  altes 
Werk.  Fiir  ein  hohes  Alter  spricht  auch  die  Reception  bei 
alien  syrischen  Secten,  die  sich  doch  sonst  unter  einander 
so  bitter  hafiten,  und  ferner  das  oben  dargelegte  Verhaltnis 
zur  jiidischen  Tradition." 

The  Edessene  Canon  omitted  Chronicles,  Ezra,  and  Nehe- 
miah.*  The  Nestorians  further  omitted  Esther.  Whether 
this  indicates  that  the  Chronicler's  work  was  translated  into 
Syriac  at  a  later  time  than  the  first  translations,  we  cannot 
say.  Wright  points  out^  "that  all  these  books  are  cited  by 
Aphraates,  and  that  they  all  appear  in  the  Codex  Ambro- 
sianus."  Later  the  books  at  first  omitted  were  received  into 
the  Canon  of  the  Peshitta.   At  what  time  we  do  not  know. 

No  interpretations  in  Ezra  indicate  the  hand  of  a  Chris- 
tian. This  may  be  due  to  the  content  of  the  book  which 
gave  no  occasion  where  a  Christian  would  be  led  to  make 
a  theological  gloss.  The  entire  translation  indicates  the  work 
of  a  most  careful  biblical  scholar.  The  Syriac  translation  of 
Ezra  is  in  no  case  slavishly  literal  as  is  that  of  the  Penta- 
teuch but  it  is  often  paraphrastic.  Why  should  it  not  be  so? 
The  translator  wanted  to  bring  out  the  meaning  of  the  ori- 
ginal as  effectively  as  possible,  and  he  felt  that  this  could 
be  done  in  a  number  of  cases  better  by  a  paraphrase  than 

1  Noldeke,  AL,  S.  264. 

2  Duval,  Lit.  Syr,  p.  32;  Nestle,  PRE3  III  S.  170. 

3  Wright,  Syr.  Lit.,  p.  5.    Homilies  of  Aphraates,  vol.  I.  pgs.  48,  358,  376. 


4  INTRODUCTION 

by  a  very  literal  translation.  Thus  he  put  into  language  in- 
telligible to  all  who  might  read  his  work,  certain  phrases 
which,  if  literally  rendered,  would,  in  his  time,  have  had  no 
meaning.^ 

In  263  for  example,  the  Hebrew  D'^Dn'pi  nni«V  ]n3  TtS^  IV 
is  rendered  by  S.  tuuo  ^JLjuo  .Aa*  Jiom>  yioju;  Asoy^.  A  com- 
parison with  the  Greek  translations  (G  &  Esd.,  G  ea)^  dvacrq 
lep8i)(;  TOii;  cpoTi^ou^iv  Kal  rote;  reXetoi^,  Esd.  dv888u|i8vog 
ri\v  b{\k(x)6iv  Kal  xi\v  dXf|-^8iav)  shows  that  all  three  para- 
phrased the  text  but  that  S.  has  given  the  clearest  explanation 
of  the  meaning  of  the  ancient  oracular  device.  G.  makes 
no  sense;  Esd.  is  better  than  G.  but  certainly  inferior  to  S. 

Not  only  in  this  case,  but  all  the  way  through,  a  com- 
parison of  S.  with  G.  shows  that  the  Peshitta  version  of  Ezra 
was  not  influenced  by  G.  This  is  against  the  opinion  ot 
Siegfried.*  The  cases  in  which  S.  and  G.  agree  against 
MT  are  of  so  unimportant  a  nature  that  the  Syriac  translator 
may  never  have  read  G.3  It  is  all  the  more  remarkable,  there- 
fore, that  Siegfried's  statement  should  have  been  accepted 
as  valid  for  more  than  twenty  years.  Evidently  nobody  has 
ever  examined  into  its  truth. 

Again,  the  generally  accepted  opinion  in  regard  to  the  in- 
dependent value  of  S.  is  also  false.  Siegfried  holds  that  the 
Syriac  "ist  oft  mehr  Umschreibung  als  Uebersetzung."  Kloster- 
mann  says  that  the  translation  is  of  little  value  due  to 
scribal  errors  and  the  "reine  Willkiir  des  Punktators."*  Torrey 
in    his    "Ezra  Studies'^   goes   even   so  far   as  to   say,   "the 

I  Cf.  2  63,  9  4-  Any  reader  of  the  English  Bible  who  has  had  no  scien- 
tific training  is  under  a  handicap  in  not  understanding  such  phrases  as  "urim 
and  tummim",  which  an  unskilled  reader  of  S.  would  not  have  experienced. 

«  Siegfried,  Esra^  Neh^mia  und  Esther  Handkommentar  S.  9  ("1st  von  den 
LXX  beeinflusst"). 

3  Cf.  G  &  S.  vs.  MT  4io-ia,  5  5.  7  8,  ^,  25,  836,  9  i- 

4  Realencyclopaedie,  Art.  Ezra-Nehemia. 


INTRODUCTION  5 

Syriac  and  Arabic  versions  of  the  canonical  Chron.-Ezra- 
Neh.  have  long  been  known  to  be  late  and  wellnigh  worth- 
less— the  Arabic  absolutely  so — :and  any  attempt  to  make  a 
critical  use  or  *  investigation'  of  them  is  a  waste  of  time."' 
Batten  in  his  commentary  on  Ezra^  ignores  S.  absolutely; 
and  Lohr  in  his  edition  of  Ezra  in  Kittel's  "Biblia  Hebraica" 
uses  it  only  three  times.  Others  3  dismiss  the  Syriac  Version 
without  a  mention  or  hold  it  to  be  of  little  value.  In  fact, 
until  the  publication  of  Professor  Bewer  s  **Der  Text  des 
Buches  Ezrd!\''  S.  has  been  wellnigh  friendless.  Professor 
Bewer  has  done  much  to  correct  the  erroneous  ideas  regard- 
ing S. 

When  we  undertake  a  comparison  between  the  Hebrew 
and  Syriac,  we  are  at  once  confronted  with  the  lack  of  a 
critical  edition  of  S.  The  Peshitta  text  is  found  only  in  the 
Codex  Ambrosianus,  in  the  Paris  and  Walton  (London)  Poly- 
glotts,  and  has  been  reprinted  three  times  by  missionary 
societies.  The  text  found  in  the  Paris  Polyglott  is  that 
edited  by  Gabriel  Sionita  from  a  late  Ms.  This,  the  "editio 
princeps",  was  printed  in  1645,  and  in  1657  reproduced  in 
the  London  Polyglott.  The  latter  is  a  careful  reprint,  there 
being  but  one  variant  spelling  (619).  In  1823  Lee  produced 
an  edition  for  the  British  and  Foreign  Bible  Society.  This, 
the  most  accessible  edition,  reproduces  with  slight  variation 
the  text  of  the  Paris  Polyglott.  In  1852  the  American 
Missionaries  at  Urumia  published  an  edition  in  Nestorian 
characters,  fully  punctated  and  in  a  simplified  spelling.s  An- 
other   edition,    published    in    1887    ^^  Mosul,   I   have   been 

1  Torrey,  Ezra  Studies  p.  64. 

2  Batten,  Commentary  on  Ezr a-Nehemiah  in  ICC  series  1913. 

3  Cf.  Steuemagel,  Einleitung  in  das  Alte  Testament^  S  17* 

4  Bewer,  Der  Text  des  Buches  Ezra,  (Gottingen,  1922). 

5  The  Urumia  Edition  has  the  classical  and  modern  Syriac  in  parallel 
columns. 


6  INTRODUCTION 

unable  to  obtain;  but  from  all  inquiries,  I  learn  that  it  has 
no  independent  value.  The  editions  are  really  the  same,  all 
of  them  being  reprints  of  the  Paris  Polyglott. 

A  minute  comparison  of  the  Paris  (P),  Walton  (W),  and 
Lee  (L)  gives  the  following  result: 

3  II    WP  J">">tto   L  i:^aa. 
42   W   ^-a«oN   PL   ^Atolj. 

6 19  WL  ax£as  P  sj^^.  This  is  a  variant  spelling.  One  form 
is  as  correct  as  the  other. 

A  similar  comparison  of  Paris,  Walton,  Lee,  and  Urumia 
(U)  yields  this  result: 

3  II  U  idAa>  n'^'^t  WP  J^^'to*"*  Q'^^fc*  L  J'v^nf*  oao^.  U  omits  ca 
reading:  "they  shouted  a  shout  of  joy";  it  is  evidently  an  im- 
proved edition  of  L. 

4  2  W  ^sjBoU  ULP  ^Jtu»l,.   The  mistake  is  in  W.   Cf.  above. 
4 10  WLP  rJ>^£ol  U  f*a«'.   Here  an  attempt  has  been  made 

to  bring  U  closer  to  MT  —  1SiD«. 

69  LP  «u-ca»  WU  *^js.  Variant  spellings  of  the  same 
word. 

826  WPL  v^^m!^^  U  v««Mt-?  '^^.  Here  U  has  been  cor- 
rected by  MT  which  reads  D*l^"^j;. 

92  WPL  JLioJolSLO  U  JLiiaas^,  MT  ^tt^^. 

From  this  comparison,  it  is  evident  that  U  was  made 
with  MT  at  hand  as  a  corrective. 

In  the  following  particulars  also  U  differs  from  PLW: 
a)  Ribui  is  often  omitted  in  the  plurals;  b)  ooio  is  omitted 
in  5  15;  c)  simplified  spelling  is  considerably  used,  e,  g.yodh 
and  aleph  are  omitted  in  such  words  as  ^lf«uJ  (PLW) 
which  U  writes     ^fxa^. 

It  is  apparent  that  for  all  practical  purpose  these  various 
editions  are  of  equal  value,  since  they  all  represent  one  and  the 
same  text.    I  have  used  L.  because  it  is  the  most  convenient. 

Unfortunately,   the  Mss.  of  the   Book   of  Ezra  have  not 


INTRODUCTION  7 

been  collated  since  the  collation  by  Thorndyke  of  the  Usher, 
Pococke,  and  Cambridge  Mss.  in  vol.  vi  of  Walton's  Polyglott, 
which  is  reproduced  here:  2  13  yioAAAjl]  nostri,  yjcuwil.  2  20  a^omo] 
nostri,  Jju^jwo.  2  25  >&oaZo  {;^o]  nostri,  {jLm  ^^^^x*  1«{|.ao.  2  22  ^^uuom] 
Uss.  ^jkAMjyo.  2  36  >5woju  JLksA.]  nostri,  lo^..  2  43  JLai-j]  nostri,  JLaX/jj. 

2  46  umXa]  nostri  ujt^olS^t.  2  52  *A»-*ji]  Poc.  t«ji.  2  47  J-»l;  -Jb  ;.,^«  ux^] 
nostri,   JLN  ;.^^  uib.    270  voomvoao]   Hebr.  postulat  yooMVojia. 

3  5  U*i.j^]  nostri ,  jju« A-  scribe  ex  Heb.  JLa*^*^©.  3  9  ).a»{jb« 
^©♦oAao]  nostri,  aia,.    4  5  Uaa:ij»]  lege  UaQik»  etsi  contra  libros. 

46  *;juu<i  loja^^ao]  «aa«(i  Q|la^t^.aaao.  410  t^iAeDl]  nOStri^  ,  i^^fnto. 
lb.  J^ji^-o?o]  nostri  KaS.  y>l.  4  n  Jbs.sAaIo]  nostri  fia:^lo.  413  ^^<  i\aa 
^jl  Jl]  Poc.  omittit  jl,  item  Uss.  417  «o]  lege  ex  Heb.  «; 
etsi  invitis  libris.  418  JLaa^JL.,]  nostri,  ua^^iol.  64  U^r»] 
nostri,  ^iM  male.  66  v^^ix*.-,]  nostri,  x^xaa**;?  male.  6  13  ou^sjkj] 
Uss.  ojuXfti:  Potius  deesse  puto  j.a^jo  ao-*?;  e  chald.  715  <t\ftovn\o] 
Poc.  o\'>qvi\>.  Uss.  n\-irt\n\.  7  17  ^jl]  nostri  «1.  8  i  \jiA>6^Alj] 
Hebr.  voom^U?!  libris  non  obstantibus.  8  14  -Iciri-]  nostri  ».-l«l.. 
8 15  lottos-]  nostri,  loo,,  ibid.  «.^o^  uia  ^]  Hebr.  postulant  «o 
jl  u»o^  ujks^  sed  libri  non  juvant  8 16  uv^S^]  fortasse  ii^iJL. 
833  ii:^  jl]  nostri  ii^X*.  836  «^«**o]  Poc.  o«h>.  91  wl«i-] 
nostri  loii.  male.  lb.  JLor^JLaj  nostri  JUi^Aao.  «  pro  j.  97  ,jjw] 
Poc.  ^oialo  ^4j-o.  98  000,]  nostri,  >^ochj.  99  ^po;j«]  videtur 
scribendum  >»f»r»?,  etsi  libri  non  juvant.  103  f*lo  ^.a^]  nostri 
o;4h{o  ot^i^.  104  ri^^o]  nostri,  v».a:i-o.  10 15  v.lQj.ia2»-]  Poc. 
V»taijL^.  10  18  JLA,;.^*]  nostri,  JLA.j^o.  1020  »ai.o]  nostri,  mJjuuw. 
The  yield  of  this  collation  is  negligible.  While  it  is,  of 
course,  quite  possible  that  a  careful  collation  of  all  existing 
Mss.  would  help  us  to  correct  a  number  of  inferior  readings, 
it  seems  likely  that  most  corruptions  will  be  found  in  almost 
all  of  them,  and  that  our  method  of  correction  cannot  be 
simply  that  of  selecting  the  best  reading  of  the  Mss.  For- 
tunately, we  have  the  original  Hebrew  text  from  which  S. 
was   translated  and  we  are   therefore   very  frequently  in  a 


8  INTRODUCTION 

position  to  remedy  the  mistakes  of  the  S  text  by  a  careful 
comparison  with  MT  and  by  pointing  out  how  the  Syriac 
which  we  now  have  has  been  corrupted  by  copyists  from 
a  Syriac  text  which  corresponded  more  closely  to  MT. 

Syriac  copyists  were  just  as  careless  and  just  as  careful  as 
other  copyists.  They  frequently  confused  letters  which  looked 
similar  to  others.  We  find,  e.  g.,  the  following  confusions 
more  or  less  frequently: 


',  ^. 

)»,   «. 

^,   ^,   >»,   V 

*, 

a>,    1. 

v>   •-• 

v^,  ^. 

-°,  i,   y 

?,   '»  f,  V,  i. 

^,   X. 

«.,    i. 

A,   o. 

h  s- 

J»,     Ci. 

^,    V,    ^. 

S     ?>    V,    ' 

^,     h     V,     ',     h 

^. 

*,    a». 

y,  ^,  v  S  ?. 

^,  ^. 
Keeping  this  in  mind,  I  find  that  the  Syriac  text  should 
be  corrected  in  the  following  places: 

Proposed  Corrections  of  the  Syriac  Text. 
Ch.  I.     8.  !?;«»»]    Iji^Ao.  —  II.  t^afojub]    ij^juk,    cf.  5  14   same 
error. 

Ch.  2.  2.  JiAiJo]  ffixoM.  —  12.  ij.^]  t-^li^.  —  ly.  5ja]  ^^a.  — 
1 8.  Noom]  I»om.  —  19.  >iAOjbki]  yjjtojw.  —  20.  t^^]  ;^^.^.  — 
25.  ^fXi^^fOe]  ^fS^)L»;ojB,  >\Aji,lo  {fATio]  ^&^^A  lotfAao.  —  30.  «t.,^e] 
••x:^.^.  —  33.  4j-w]  wt-«.  —  36.  ;-odI]  '^l  —  40.  i-x»j-«]  "^^M^, 
Miido]  »a&ao.  —  42.  ^A^il]  JLa^il,   v^Stt^Xs.]  ^\n\^,   00  ns*]  laoA^.  — 

43.   1-^j]     i-*^t>     J^*^**]   ifiOAM.     44.   JBSfJB]     kCSiUB,    ^^U*]     JL^AJt,    >^rA] 

^^^a.  —  45.  Us"^]  jiLi^.,  AftAx]  ooA^.  —  47.  "^lU^]  '^r^,  V.5^] 
r**-«ss,,  i*h]  ^^''  —  48.  \Oj-j]  ^j»,  Ji^aj]  IjOAJ.  —  49.  uk/K»]  oyt.ma, 
teask]  um'^.  —  50.  JIaadI]  Jlcd^,  JLaiKm]  yajaa>kao.  —  51.  «QjtftJk#]  jOM^jh*.  — 


INTRODUCTION  9 

52.  /fjuLso]  It-uoio  or  l;-aiao,  cf.  text.  ad.  loc.  —  53.  ^oa^jb] 
osjojBf^,  >W0l]  uuaol.  —  54.  j^*^]  i^i^^  (?).  —  55.  f^:^]  ^-r^^, 
yiAV^ui^]  yxAA,  yiA^m]  wl^.j».  —  56.  JUS.:^]  1^^:^,  ^^il]  \^5j.  — 
57.  loM^]  lofAA,  pal]  »ool.  —  58.  >u\*o  f^^]  JbaSjh  «t^a^.  — 
59.  JL\^<>\M]  u,>.\vi\I,   ua;ai>]  00^.  —  60.  i-»;j"]  Noaj.  —  61.  j«*»*] 

Ch.  3.     2.  ^IfiOut]  '^IK^JA.  —  8.  ;,*]  -;*.  —  9.  i^r«]  ^^^r*, 

i^6»]    1^.    —    II.  JL:^ao^]   JLxaoxa.. 

Ch.  4.  6.  Ji4^]  Jixfrxa.  —  7.  lijo»ao]  l,i»OD,  cf.  18.  —  8.  *i**] 
ujiioA.  —  9.  JUa;^]  i^a^,  Uavl]  JLlsvI.  —  10.  ^Aa«l]  ^axml.  — 
22.   J  Avi\.]  J9\^\.. 

Ch.  5.     3.  0*^*^n   .^joaiK*!.   —    16.  jio»   ^Kxa]    (tti:!^    Kxs  (?). 

Ch.  6.  2.  Uh»j]  jifaoj.  —  3.  .^j]  ^po.  —4.  Kil]  JLi.apo  (?).  — 
12.  ,^uAal}]   ,jftAlj,  pa^]   po^. 

Ch.  7.     2.  -ys^]   -IX. 

Ch.  8.      2.  pol]     fJoJL#r    —    4.  wJA    wJkUwO    U>^]    ^     u.ljL^i.OeU^.    

5.  V.ljuaj]  V.ljuuu.  —  7.  JUaKi]  jLA-is:^.  —  8.  jL-;^;]  Ut^).  — 
9.  V»Uu]  ^JLu-..  —  10.  JLaoroi]  JL.afloa*.  ~  12.  f^^ix]  r!s»*^» 
i;aa)]  lio^l.  —  13.  yiOAjyil]  ysOAAJjl,  ^..jxi]  V»JLx>.  —  1 5.  ?JLi2^] 
Us.^.  —  16.  ^-^^t]  v^^^~*^;  •^A']  «:^-»;-«^,  opa>  Ck^{^«.«.  —  18.  JL»Mk] 
i-^r*.  —   21.  v\<*4-^']  ^?  **a&N    (?).   —  33-  -^^is*]   '-*^- 

Ch.  10.  2.  ^.►ijLxi]  V»Jju-..  —  6.  >wfc-ii^]  ojkjui^.  —  9.  tltms^] 
yi^.rns^.  —  15.  ^{ai2ax]  ^jLco:^,  J-»Uxi]  JLlxu,  wKi»]  -K^m  or 
wKaa.  —  18.  ojaa^]  «^^;^QL».  —  21.  "^JLuj-J  ^J-uul».  —  22.  ^J] 
^aji2\,  ^iaa*]  V»JL^.>aA^,  «^j^]  r^i^-».  —  23.  f^J^  r^^^}  '"^ 
J  ^.\  no]  l^«i^J»  o^  JLXao.  —  24.  >iJu25S.]  ojkiu^,  wjo']  -»•'.  — 
25.  JLljju]  JL»u,  ^j^aojoa]  u^&am,  pi^X,]  ii^S^  or  ii^A^^.  —  26.  Ui)^] 
Ui^^^,  ^^.^JLa^]  ^J^uu.-.  or  "^Jjuu.  —  27.  JLM]  'J^J,  «aA.>A^]  .a.s  o .% 
cuu!^]  o.aaaS^,  JLxiKj]  Ui&s»,  iOA)]  ^;,  JUjox]  (u^x.  —  29.  u^a] 
uJA,  >3q\*1  ^]  ^o^jiM,  JLtjdx]  Ut^,  c^AO^]  ooju,  ^oJLa]  ^JL».  — 
30.  JLA^f,^]  Ji^:^,  JLauo  ula  wotdi^o]  jjtuso  woiOiAO.  —  3 1,  ioiui] 
JL»ju»l,  —  32.  U^oo*]  JLpa*.  —  33.  ;^)]  ^j,  ps^]  »oo;^.  —  34.  «jo] 
uia  (?).  —  35.  fa]  JLja.  —  37-  -J^ubo:*-]  -jn:^.  —  39.  Muk-]  JL»yX. — 


lO  INTRODUCTION 

40.  taUAa*]  «atAA»,  wfxo]  ^;jfc.  —  41.  V»N;^]  ^-lit^.  —  43.  V»laai] 

While  most  of  these  corrections  concern  names,  there  is 
still  a  goodly  number  of  other  cases  where  the  original 
reading  has  been  restored.  It  seems  to  me  quite  obvious 
that  the  method  which  Professor  Bewer  used  in  his  "Text 
des  Buches  Ezra"  for  the  Greek  versions,  must  be  applied 
to  the  Syraic  text  too  and  that  any  editing  of  S.  which 
simply  professes  to  give  the  best  available  text  of  the  Mss. 
is  not  a  critical  edition.  We  are  not  left  to  speculate 
or  to  conjecture  wildly  about  a  possible  text,  because 
we  have  the  Hebrew  text  from  which  S.  was  translated 
and  have  therefore  a  constant  check  and  norm  at  our 
disposal.  It  is,  of  course,  not  claimed  that  every  one  of  the 
above  proposed  emendations  of  S.  represents  certainly  the 
original  Syriac  reading,  but  I  believe  in  most  cases  it  has 
actually  been  rediscovered  by  this  method.  This,  in  itself, 
is  an  important  contribution  to  the  textual  history  of  the 
Book  of  Ezra,  but  it  is  not  the  most  valuable,  because  it  is 
even  more  significant  that  in  our  comparison  of  S.  with  MT 
we  find  a  number  of  places  where  S.  has  retained  a  better 
reading  than  MT,  in  other  words,  where  the  original  Hebrew 
Text  can  be  restored  on  the  basis  of  S, 

Before  giving  a  list  of  these,  we  must  make  clearer  the 
character  of  the  Peshitta  Version  of  Ezra. 

The  Syriac  translation,  as  has  already  been  pointed  out, 
is,  in  the  main,  carefully  made  and  true  to  the  sense  with- 
out  being  slavishly  literal.  The  translator  has  done  exactly 
as  we  do  in  rendering  French  or  German  into  English.  On 
the  other  hand,  in  the  forms  of  the  verb,  especially  in  the 
suffixes,  and  in  the  additions  and  omissions  of  the  copula, 
a  greater  freedom  is  taken  than  we  would  like.  How  far 
this  can  be  laid  at  the  door  of  the  copyists  we  cannot  say. 


INTRODUCTION  II 

In  the  matter  of  synonyms  for  theological  ideas  and  offices 
an  interchange  is  common;  but  in  no  case  is  the  sense  of 
the  text  injured.  In  the  case  of  doublets,  such  as  9  7  und  10  12, 
the  blame  must  not  be  laid  on  the  translator.  These  are 
more  likely  marginal  references  which  later  copyists  put  into 
the  text. 

As  is  to  be  expected  in  any  text  that  has  suffered  much 
at  the  hands  of  copyists,  there  are  many  words  omitted. 
The  omissions,  however,  are  of  an  unimportant  nature.  They 
consist  mostly  of  particles,  the  copula,  words  not  understood, 
and  certain  words  in  paraphrastic  phrases.  Omissions  occur 
in:  II,  2,  6;  231,  68,  69;  313;  43,  5,  10,  13,  14,  17,  22;  57, 
8,  II,  12,  15,  17;  61,  2,  3,  5,  7,  8,  10,  13,  20,  21;  71,  9,  10,  12, 
13,  14,  15,  17,  24,  28;  83,  6,  15,  20,  26,  27;  96,  8;  109,  14,  19, 
20,  23,  24,  25,  27,  29,  30,  31,  43. 

There  is  also  a  large  number  of  additions.  These,  as  in 
the  case  of  the  omissions,  are  of  an  unimportant  character 
and  are  due  to  the  copyists. '  By  far  the  largest  number 
of  the  omissions  and  additions  are  those  of  the  copula. 
The  translator  has  also  a  fondness  for  adding  the  obvious, 
e,  g.,  when  a  person  is  referred  to  in  MT  by  name  only,  the 
S.  translator  adds,  in  nearly  every  case  the  title  of  his  office, 
e.  g.,  Ezra  (the  scribe  or  priest),  etc.  Additions  occur  in: 
I  I,  2,  6,  7,  10,  II;  21,  3,  4,  5,  7,  II,  13,  14,  17,  19,  21,  23,  26, 
27,  28,  31,  2>3,  36,  37,  41,  42,  58,  60,  62,  64,  6s,  66,  67;  38,  9,  10, 
12;  42,  3,  6,  7,  8,  12,  15,  17,  19,  23;  53,  8,  II,  14,  17;  63,  8,9, 
II,  14,  16,  18,  20,  21;  71,  6,  7,  10,  12,  13,  14,  15,  16,  18,  21,  23, 
25,  27;  81,  17,  19,  26,  30;  91,  4,  5,  7,  10,  13,  15;  10  2,  3,  5,  6, 
7,  8,  9,  10,   12,  13,  15,   16,  19,  30,  35,  41,  42. 

Variants  in  the  Divine  name  commonly  occur.  The  trans- 
lator invariably  renders  mn^  by  Ur»  in  keeping  with  Jewish 
tradition.  Occasionally  U^Tht^  is  also  rendered  by  Uv»  e.  g. 
15;  38,  9;  622;  715;  10  I,  6,  9. 


I 


12  INTRODUCTION 

Words  are  sometimes  misunderstood.  Several  words  from 
the  Persian  occur  in  Ezra.  These  the  translator  has  not 
always  understood  as  is  shown  by  the  following:  8i1BD« 
which  S.  has  as  follows:  5  8  iKavoi  cf.  note  ad  loc.  68  omits; 
6  12  V,^*^  "quickly";  7  21  JL>J  ft  *«■»  "zealously";  7  17,  26 
\^\aj^  "carefully",  ^nu^^nn,  the  designation  of  the  Persian 
Governor  of  Judea  in  Ezra  2  63  is  given  as  ^f;xQ>N  JLjuy. 
Cf.  note  ad  loc.  In  Ezra  413,  20;  724  is  a  list  of  the  terms 
used  for  toll  and  customs.  The  translator  misunderstood 
these  terms  and  rendered  as  follows:  4 13,  MT "tribute,  custom, 
toll"  by  a  paraphrase  "there  will  be  no  tribute  for  thee". 
4  20:  Here  the  translator  departs  yet  farther  from  MT,  para- 
phrasing the  original  "and  tribute,  toll,  and  custom  was  paid 
them"  by  "and  for  the  former  kings  they  had  no  regard  at 
all."  7  24,  MT  reads,  "Tribute,  custom,  and  toll  it  is  not  law- 
ful to  levy  on  them"  by  "it  is  not  lawful  to  say  a  thing 
to  them."  In  48,  54,  and  613  occurs  the  word  i<Di3 
which  the  translator  mistook  and  translated  by  JLADoau  ^.l 
except  in  59,  11,  where  the  word  occurs  again  it  is  correct- 
ly rendered.  In  4 13  the  word  DJnBX  "impost"  (reading 
with  many  Mss.  DnSi<)  is  incorrectly  translated  by  -o.  a\ 
'*also  she". 

As  to  the  k'thib  and  k're  the  translator  used  his  own 
judgment  as  to  the  better  reading  but  preferred  the  k're  to 
the  k'thib.  Out  of  a  total  of  28  cases,  the  translator  uses 
the  k're  17  times,  the  k'thib  6  times  and  follows  his  own 
judgment  5  times.     The  list  follows: 


K'thib 

^'re 

Syriac 

21  "ii2{inDUi 

-i^JiiDUi 

\^yJ,^XS^ 

==  k're. 

246         "'!?0t5^ 

1^715^ 

.oaV* 

=  k're. 

2  50      D^D^'Bi 

D^DISi 

^fDOAi 

=  k're. 

3  3       '^ri 

l^ri 

OAtfto 

=  k're. 

INTRODUCTION 

13 

KUib 

KVe 

Syriac 

42 

»b) 

1^1 

•ai«ll,«  = 

=  k're. 

44 

n\n^5»^ 

D^!?nnfi"i 

^«6.aMO  = 

=  k'thib. 

47 

iniiD 

vniiD 

0|1<L»U 

=  kUib. 

49 

''iDi« 

N-'DIS 

Uavl 

S.    here 

follows 

49 

Sim 

411 

yi:iV 

51 

n«^ni 

512 

«nDD 

6  14 

n«^ni 

617 

«"'tDnV 

718 

ybv 

T«nK 

725 

p«i 

neither  k'thib  nor  k're  but  reads  independently  «''D'1«  which 
a  later  scribe  has  carelessly  written  i<''nn«.  Torrey  suggests 
this  reading^  but  gives  no  credit  to  the  Peshitta. 

«Nm  JLip,,  =  k're. 

^laV  y.y:^x  =  k'thib. 

K'-ni  JLoj  =  k're. 

n«*lD3  JL/j^  =  k're. 

«tDi  ixAj  ==  k're. 

n«t3n^  l^t^  =  independent. 

l^V  A  =  k're. 

^n«  yxjc^  =  k'thib. 

l-'in  v^,  =  k're. 

7  26  S.  paraphrases  and  reads  independently. 

8 13  b»)V''  V«"'V"'  ^JL:^  S.  read  originally 
k're.     A  copyist  has  confused  ^  and  i. 

814  ^i::it  "^13»  i<^j  =  k're. 

8  17  S.  paraphrases  but  follows  k're  ad  sensum. 
102  D^IV  D^^j;  >i\^  =  k're. 

10 12  f^yi^         TimD       yAsisJ^  =  k'thib. 

niani  lojov-o  =  k'thib. 

im^D  o«M^  =  independent. 

•"t^VI  -l4iw  =  k're  originally. 

''T     S.  omits. 
1«tJfi  oaoni  =  k're. 

This    proves    that    the    translator    knew    the    traditional 
reading  of  the  synagogue  but  by  no  means  felt  bound  by 

I  Cf.  Ezra  Studies,  ad  loc. 


1029 

niDi"' 

1035 

Nnib 

1037 

wy^^ 

1043 

H'' 

1044 

^Kty:i 

14  INTRODUCTION 

that  system.  No  decisive  argument  can  be  deduced  from 
the  above  to  prove  that  the  translator  was  a  Jew;  a 
Christian  would  have  known  the  k're  corrections  as  well  as 
a  Jew. 

Differences  in  vocalization  frequently  occur.  The  majority 
of  these  instances  are  confined  to  proper  names.  All  these 
cases  are  fully  discussed  in  the  text  further  on. 

Free  paraphrases  occur  in  every  chapter.  These  are  in 
some  instances  due  to  foreign  words,  the  meaning  of  which 
the  translator  did  not  know.  In  the  second  place,  the  trans- 
lator shows  a  predilection  to  add  explanatory  words,  such 
as  priest,  prophet,  etc.  In  the  third  case,  paraphrases  ex- 
plain what  would  otherwise  be  unintelligible  to  the  trans- 
lator's readers.  G.  misunderstood  some  of  these  passages 
in  the  original  and  nothing,  it  would  seem,  shows  so 
clearly  the  independence  of  S.  over  G  as  2  63 :  MT  pD 
D-'ttfl^l  Dni«^  (cf.  Neh.  765).  S.  paraphrases  by  JLa?  Jio^. 
tiMio  ^Jljuo,  while  GAB  translates  with  an  attempt  at  extreme 
literalness  iepeuc;  toic;  cp(joTit,oD(5iv  Kal  zekeioK;  which  makes 
no  sense.  GAB  wrongly  connects  D''11fc<  and  D'^DH  with  11i< 
and  dion.  The  Peshitta  translator  understood  the  meaning. 
First,  there  is  the  addition  of  ia?  to  J»o>a  (cf.  Ex.  2830, 
Lev.  818,  Num.  2721)  which  shows  historical  accuracy  and 
also  is  in  keeping  with  the  translator's  habit  of  adding  ex- 
planatory words.  In  the  second  place,  he  paraphrases  cor- 
rectly the  meaning  of  D'lDn^l  D"'11«b.  If  the  Peshitta  trans- 
lation of  Ezra  had  been  made  under  the  influence  of  G, 
should  we  not  expect  its  influence  to  be  seen  in  a  difficult 
passage  such  as  this? 

Another  passage  of  the  same  order  is  9  4  where  y\ift\  nn^D 
is  translated  by  ^^xa  ^ii^X.  Here  again  GAB  follows  MT 
literally  with  xf\(;  ^uciac;  xr\(;  t67tepivi\(;.  The  translator  of 
the  Peshitta,  however,  with  historical  accuracy,  renders  "until 


INTRODUCTION  15 

the  ninth  hour",  i  g.y  the  hour  of  prayer,  which,  in  the  times, 
when  there  was  no  temple,  and  so  no  minhah,  took  the 
place  of  the  evening  sacrifice  \  The  translator,  exactly  as 
in  2  63,  has  not  literally  rendered  words  which  might  be  mis- 
understood or  meaningless  but  by  his  paraphrase  has  made 
the  passage  perfectly  intelligible  to  his  readers. 

Another  instance  occurs  in  10 1.  MT  has  here  "and  the 
people  wept'*;  the  translator  has  paraphased  this  as  "the 
children  wept"  which  seemed  to  him  to  be  the  true  meaning 
of  the  original. 

While  these  instances  show  the  freedom  of  the  translator, 
they  by  no  means  prove  that  the  Peshitta  is  a  mere  para- 
phrase. Moreover,  in  none  of  these  illustrations  is  there  the 
slightest  dependence  on  G.  These  passages  and  a  few 
similar  ones  that  occur  in  the  translation  are  fully  discussed 
in  the  comparison  of  the  text  with  MT. 

It  is  manifest  that  the  Syriac  translator  has  succeeded,  on 
the  whole,  remarkably  well  in  presenting  the  Book  of  Ezra 
in  a  good  Syriac  dress  to  his  countrymen  and  that  it  could 
thus  take  its  place  appropriately  in  the  Syriac  Bible. 

For  the  Biblical  scholar,  however,  and  especially  for  the 
textual  critic,  the  greatest  value  of  the  Peshitta  of  Ezra  lies 
in  the  fact  that  it  has  in  forty-two  instances  preserved  the 
original  reading,  and  therefore  it  must  be  employed  to  recon- 
struct the  Hebrew  text  of  the  Massorites.  These  original  read- 
ings are  as  follows: 

1  6  m^]  «a^;  =  Ih*?  =  *Very  much"  which  is  undoubtedly 
the  original  reading. 

2  25  D"'1V  ^"""^P]  ^f^  K*«aj»  which  was  originally  ^^iX* 
«  D^"ip\  A  scribe  has  carelessly  written  i  for  *  both 
here  and  in  Neh.  729.     S.  represents  here  (in  the  original) 

1  Duhm,  Die  Psalmen,  to  Ps.  141  a-    Cf.  also  Acts^  3  x. 


l6  INTRODUCTION 

the  correct  reading.  MT  is  due  to  carelessness.  GAB 
and  Neh.  729  both  bear  witness  with  S.  that  MT  must  be 
corrected. 

34  rh)f]  ll«:s^  S.  here  with  G  and  several  Heb.  mss.  has 
preserved  the  plural  and  MT  must  be  corrected  accord- 
ingly. 

3  9  7VX\tT]  J-*)«o»  =  rfTin.  As  2  40  shows,  S.  has  here  pre- 
served the  correct  form  of  this  name. 

3 10  ITDJ^'^I]  «xaa*o  =  HD^^'I.  S.  agrees  with  several  Heb. 
Mss.  and  G,  and  undoubtedly  represents  the  original. 

3  12  ]1t^«in  n"'niTn«]  i^fj>  U?  d^jujLa  lio,  iiu^:^  S.  alone  of 
all  the  versions  has  here  preserved  the  original  reading,  viz. 
"this  house  in  its  great  honor".  MT  has  lost  the  words  '*in  its 
great  honor",  and  must  be  corrected  by  supplying  ni32  y^Ti, 

nnDty^]  llo#ju3o.  S.  reads  the  copula,  as  does  Esd., 
which    is   the    correct   reading.     MT   must   be   changed   to 

4  3  tyiS-lte  lyilD  l!?nn]  «fs  l^^  AtJ)  S.  omits  l^H  (G  and 
Esd.  also).  MT  should  be  corrected  accordingly,  since  **King 
Cyrus,  King  of  Persia"  is  evidently  redundant. 

410  iT1p3]  i-»vaA3  S.  reads  "in  the  cities  of  the  province 
of  Samaria".  This  (cf.  2  Kgs.  17  24)  is  also  G's  reading  and 
is  preferable  to  MT's  "in  the  city". 

4  23  Din"1]  +  i.a*^.i  '^':^  S.  and  GL  alone  preserve  the  ori- 
ginal text.  The  title  Dj;iD"^V^  must  be  inserted  in  the  Hebrew. 
Cf  vss.  8,  9,  17. 

5  I  fc^''«^^i]  JLoj.  S.  has  quite  grammatically  "Haggai  the 
prophet  and  Zechariah  the  son  of  Iddo  the  prophet."  This 
is  certainly  better  than  MT  and  it  may  represent  the  ori- 
ginal text.  The  alternative  is  to  follow  Esd.  in  omitting 
n«Oi  after  ""in. 

54  «i1t3H]  •po^  S.  and  G  have  preserved  here  the  ori- 
ginal text.     MT  must  be  emended  to  read  "I10«. 


INTRODUCTION  17 

5 17  !?:nin  n  non  «D^D-n  «nii  n'^nn]  it^  Kx=»  j^u  UKiia 

>;  JLaSao,  MT  reads  here  "in  the  king's  treasury  there  which 
is  in  Babylon"  but  S.  reads  "in  the  records,  that  are  in  the 
treasury  of  the  kings  of  Babylon."  MT  does  not  here  pre- 
sent the  original  text  and  must  be  emended  to  read  with  S. 
which  here  undoubtedly  presents  the  original  =  H"*!!!  *•!  i^"'1BDl 

^^]  J  ==  "'*T.  So  also  several  Heb.  mss.  and  Esd.  This  is 
clearly  the  preferable  reading.    G  has  both  readings. 

6  2  «nDnfc^l2]  v^^ooAjJLa.  S.  preserves  the  original  form  of  this 
Persian  word.    Cf.  BDB. 

63  Q^tS^n^n]  )8i^ioJLa  h^U  =  D!?^n''n-''n.  So  several  Heb.  mss., 
Esd.,  G,  and  Vulg.  This  is  the  original  text  and  MT  must 
be  corrected  accordingly. 

JTlty]  ^ftt^.  S.  corresponds  here  to  i  Kg.  6  2  and 
apparently  represents  the  original.  The  reading  in  MT  is 
influenced  by  the  preceding  ^rWff, 

618  «nV«  riTir'^W  l«^?  '^^^?  l^r*^^  Vk-.  S.  agrees  with 
G^  and  is  better  than  MT.  We  must  insert  therefore  in  the 
Aramaic  text  Sy^2  before  i<n^J^. 

7 12  1"»0i]  >b\*.  S.  alone  has  preserved  the  epistolatory 
style  demanded,  viz.  "greeting". 

7  19  D^iyiT*  n^«]  >i\AioJb;  /o»i5^.  S.  presents  the  original  and 
only  possible  reading.  The  reading  in  MT  is  unparalleled. 
MT  must  accordingly  be  corrected  to  D^K^n''!  H  KH^fc^. 

7  22  ni^D  ITin  1^1]  JA*  J^'  U**:^  Ujj*-.  The  order  of  MT 
has  been  confused  by  a  copyist  and  should  read  as  does 

S.  j'^nn  nty»  nyv 

7  25  Til]  |.«oasai.  S.  translates  by  a  singular.  The  Greek 
versions  also  have  the  singular  which  Guthe  (Esra  ad  loc) 
and  others  believe  is  the  original  reading.  Vs.  26  favors  the 
singular  =  n"1. 

2 


l8  INTRODUCTION 

8  12  n'W)^]  ^««^.  S.  reads  with  38  Heb.  mss.  and  Esd.L 
what  is  undoubtedly  the  original.  MT  should  be  emended 
accordingly  to  D"'*1tJ^y. 

8  24  n^^K^n]  U^iftnA.o.  S.  with  Esd.AB  has  preserved  the 
original  reading  because  Hashabia  was  not  a  priest  but  a 
Levite  according  to  vs.  18. 

8  34  ^pti^tol]  l\j»Kaaao.  The  copula  must  be  inserted  in  MT 
to  read  bptJ^JOni  with  S. 

9 1  DHTinj^nS]  v««»UjLaai^  =  DiT'nnvnn,  so  also  G  and  this 
was  most  probably  the  original  reading.     So  Bewer. 

93  ''l^lD]  ^Kju4.  MT  must  be  emended  to  read  nil  with 
S.  instead  of  sing. 

9  4  ''1111]  /i^Xao  '^A.  =  1111.  The  reading  in  S.  is  vouched 
for  by  G,  Esd.,  and  Vulg.  and  doubtlessly  represents  the 
original  reading.    Cf.  Bewer  ad  loc. 

9  12  dViv]  A^^  ==  0^**^  =  k're  of  MT  which  is  preferable 
to  MT  kethib.  This  reading  is  vouched  for  by  G,  Esd.L 
and  Vulg. 

105  D""lSn]  JL-o^,*.  S.  reads  "priests  and  Levites"  -^  D''l!?ni 
MT  should  be  corrected  accordingly. 

106  "^^^1]  oK-o  ==  ]^'<1.  A  scribe  has  carelessly  written  "^ 
for  ]  in  MT.     S,  preserves  the  original  reading.    (Esd.  also.) 

107  D^li^11"'1]  >a\jk«o|Lao.  S.  here  has  preserved  the  original 
which  is  vouched  for  by  many  Heb.  Mss.  and  also  by  G. 
The  context  also  demands  it  in  agreement  with  the  previous 
"in  Judea". 

10 14  IV]  ^M^«  MT  must  be  emended  to  read  h'^  for  IV 
according  to  the  more  original  reading  of  S. 

10 16  'l^11''1]  «;«•.  S.  (cf  also  G)  g^ves  evidence  of  an 
original  !?15!1  which  MT  demands  as  Ezra  is  subject  of  the 
sentence.     MT  reads  plural;  but  this  must  be  emended. 

10  16  K^VII^]  eiX  n<sg>&>»S.  =  tyill*?.  This  is  the  correct  read- 
ing.    MT  must  be  accordingly  corrected. 


mTRODUCTION  19 

10 17  n'^mn]  IvA^  vod^ji.  MT  must  be  emended  to  read  n'^m^Ti. 

1020  nn:nt]  j^^aj.  S.  and  9  Heb.  Mss.  may  well  represent 
the  original. 

10  31  0*111  ''^11]  yi^  ««Ia  «.  GAB  and  many  Heb.  mss. 
agree  with  S.  in  this  reading  which  is  doubtless  original. 
MT  must  be  corrected  to  read  ''i^pl.  GAB,  Esd.ALB 
vocalize  U^n  as  does  S.  MT  must  also  be  corrected  to  read 
with  S. 

1034  "'il]  «Jo.  Cf.  vs.  29  where  the  "sons  of  Bani"  are 
already  listed.  S.  must  be  correct,  as  one  clan  would  not 
be  listed  twice.  MT  must  accordingly  be  corrected  to 
read  ^D^. 

^«1«]  V»?a.  =-  %V  to  which  Esd.ABL  and  GLB  also 
testify.     MT  must  be  accordingly  corrected. 

10  35  %11^D,  k're  IHI^D]  oo>Aj»  =  1iT^3  which  may  have  pre- 
served the  original  reading. 

1038  *^)^y\  ""iini]  ^«iajb>  Miao.  S.,  in  spite  of  a  scribal  cor- 
ruption, has  preserved  the  original  reading  -^jls  *4ia« ,  z.  e. 
"the  sons  of  Binnui".  So  also  G.  MT  must  be  accordingly 
corrected  to  ""lin  '•ill. 


20     A  CRITICAL  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  PESHITTA 


CHAPTER  I 

1.  tX^rHV]  +  Uaj.  Cf.  also  I  2,  7.  The  translator  of  Ezra  adds 
such  explanatory  words.  Cf.  the  parallel  in  2  Chr.  36  22  where 
the  same  addition  is  made. 

••Stt]  o^i*^*^  ^  is  a  free  translation.  S.  supports  MT  over 
against  ^B2  of  Esd.  and  GL  In  the  duplicate  section, 
2  Chr.  36  22,  "'Bl  =  «Hjoaaa. 

DID  "^'jfi  V^^].  S.  omits.  1^13  here,  either  by  accident  or 
by  oversight  of  a  copyist. 

2.  mabfia  h^]  JloaXao.  The  translator  or  a  copyist  may 
have  omitted  accidentally  both  h^  and  the  s^iame  points  of 
(loalM.  But  it  is  also  possible  that  Vd  seemed  superfluous 
to  the  translator,  because  he  took  the  Hebrew  to  mean  ''the 
rule  of  the  earth".  In  any  case  we  need  not  assume  that 
the  translator  had  a  Hebrew  original  different  from  the  MT. 

n^U^lTn]  -1-  I)L»;ji.     Cf.  note  on  vs.  i. 

3.  lOV"^^^]  ^^*^  •^^  «•  As  in  2  Chr.  3623  the  duplicate 
section. 

M^]  0010. 

4.  inife^tyi'']  a^oISjuu.  This  is  a  very  literal  translation  which 
does  not  represent  the  true  meaning  of  the  Hebrew  here 
which  is  to  "help".  G  also  did  not  know  this  meaning, 
translating  Xf||i-vl/ovTai. 

nin'']   l<»Sk  JLfj«i^.     The   translator  took  the  relative  lt5^«  to 


VERSION  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  EZRA  21 

refer  to  mn"'  and  translated  "a  house  for  the  Lord  ^MV  the 
God  who  is  in  Jerusalem".  Taking  mn^  as  a  proper  name, 
his  addition,  the  God,  was  appropriate  and  quite  in  accord- 
ance with  his  habit  (cf.  note  on  i  i).  MT  reads :  "the  house 
of  niiT  which  is  in  Jerusalem." 

6.  Iptn]  ojjk^K    S.  renders  freely,  due  perhaps  to  DiTTn. 

I^ntl]  Jbo»,o  etc.  The  translator  does  not  repeat  the  pre- 
position governing  two  nouns  in  succession  as  the  Syriac 
style  does  not  require  such  a  repetition. 

nn^]  o-ij.  MT  here  is  evidently  corrupt.  S,  (also  Esd.) 
reads  „very  much"  which  is  doubtless  the  original  reading. 

minn-b"'?y]  0*^-4^1,  ,-A^t  ,e.  S.  understood  m^nn  as  re- 
ferring to  the  persons  who  gave  freely  and  translated  ac- 
cordingly. MT  took  it  as  referring  to  the  gifts  which  were 
given  to  the  temple  (in  accordance  with  vs.  4)  and  its  mean- 
ing is  "in  addition  (Vy)  to  all  that  had  been  freely  given" 
(to  the  temple).  S's  original  apparently  did  not  have  ^D, 
it  was  neither  in  G  nor  in  Esd.L  and  must  therefore  have 
been  omitted  in  the  Hebrew  mss.  (accidentally  through  haplo- 
graphy).  That  it  was  in  the  older  texts  is  clear  not  only 
from  MT  but  from  Esd.AB.  Cf.  Bewer,  Text  des  Buches 
Ezra,  S.  14. 

7.  I^JilDUi]  -1-  ^^uL^A,  Ks^.    Cf.  note  on  vs.  i. 

8.  minD]  li;e^.  It  is  quite  apparent  that  this  reading 
is  not  due  to  the  original  translator  who  wrote  IjiKsp  but  to 
a  careless  copyist  who  mistook  I  for  o». 

1:J215^U^]  n^MLM..  This  also  must  not  be  put  to  the  account 
of  the  translator  who  wrote  ij^jut  but  to  that  of  a  care- 
less scribe  who  wrote  this  incorrectly  and  fixed  the  wrong 
form  in  his  mind,  for  he  makes  the  same  mistake  in  I  n,  5  14. 

9.  "'VlDlJfc^]  Usss,'.  S.  interprets  as  meaning  "bowls'.  D''s!?nD] 
]^^\.    The  translator  connected  the  word  with  ^Ti  change. 


22     A  CRITICAL  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  PESHITTA 

Cf.  riB^^n  garment  for  changing.     The  Vulg.  renders  cidtri 
and  Esd.  -^uteKai  dpyupat. 

10.  Apparently  the  translator  had  omitted  the  gold  bowls 
first;  then  he  noticed  his  mistake  and  added  them  with  ool. 

D^^D]  +  o.  The  addition  of  the  copula,  although  of  no  cri- 
tical significance,  is  noted.  (Cf.  discussion  of  these  additions 
and  omissions  in  the  Introduction.) 

11.  12{nt5^K^]  ;jaajut.    Cf.  note  on  vs.  8. 

^iSD  n'?i:in]  ^^uc^a  «  iua^^,  IKa^a,.    The  addition  of 
is  simply  in  the  interest  of  a  good  translation. 


VERSION  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  EZRA 


CHAPTER  II 

1.  n7l3n  ^^tS^D]  ixa*  «.  The  translator  probably  regarded 
n^lin  as  superfluous  and,  accordingly,  left  it  untranslated. 
Cf.  Neh.  7  6  where  both  words  are  literally  rendered  as 
in  MT. 

b22h  ♦  ♦  ♦  n^:in]    ^*-.-.\    ^^l   VaoU  .  .  .  ia^,.  S.    freely 

renders  MT's  „carried  into  exile — to  Babylon",  by  "which 
he  carried  into  exile — and  brought  them  to  Babylon". 
Neh.  76  translates  MT  literally  as  above. 

Ult^M]  o^jU  .  .  .  o^aoto.    This  is  a  similar  free  translation. 

2.  ^12i1t]  ^^uL&aioj.  This  is  the  regular  Syriac  vocalization 
in  Ezra,  Neh.,  Hag,  and  Zech. 

)B^^2]  ^jkAo.     This  is  due  to  a  different  vocalization. 

IDDtt]  JiAiao.  The  translator  misunderstood  this  name  and 
incorrectly  translated  it  "number". 

^^^Ity*  DV  ''t5^i«]  ^lf.«u»N  JLjiiN.  S.  avoids  the  tautological 
expression  of  MT  by  omitting  DV.  In  Neh.  yy,  however, 
S.  translates  it  verbatim. 

6.  :i«1D  nns]  ^1*^0  ^rA>^«*  in  Ezra.  S.  always  translates 
nns  as  if  it  were  a  noun.  (Neh.  711  idem.)  The  translator 
of  Hag.  II,  2  22  renders  it  by  iai,  taking  it  as  did  the  translator 
of  Ezra.  The  term  had,  by  this  time,  become  a  proper 
name. 

•"il^]  ujb.  S.  disregards  the  b  =  "namely"  (cf.  1 5)  and 
continues  the  catalogue  noting  each  as  a  separate  clan. 


24     A  CRITICAL  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  PESHITTA 

2«V]  oJo^o.  S  correctly  renders  1«V1.  Neh.  7,  and  Esd. 
also  vouch  for  the  reading  in  S. 

8.  «inT]  JL-lj.  The  difference  in  the  vocalization  is  probably 
due  to  the  omission  of  the  mater  leciionis  in  the  Ms.  which 
the  translator  used. 

10.  tJ^tJ^]  was  omitted  by  a  careless  scribe. 

12.  *i:iTJ?]  irs^.  This  is  evidently  a  scribal  corruption  for 
y^u^.    Cf.  Neh.  7  17. 

13.  Dp'^ilK]  >.aj(uaj/.  This  is  the  usual  Syriac  transcription. 
Neh.  7  17  and  Ezra  8  13   )BaAjL»;^  is  a  scribal  corruption  for 

15-  PV]  v'r*--  This  is  the  same  as  in  Neh.  720.  Cf.  note 
on  28. 

D^lSf»n]  ,-»K*lo.  This  mistake  was  probably  occasioned  by 
the  figure  in  the  preceding  verse. 

16.  n^ptlT'b]  JLajbuA..  This  is  without  ^  preformative  as  MT 
Neh.  7  21. 

17.  ''2Jn]  ;^.  This  is  a  copyist's  mistake  for  the  original  -^ 
as  in  Neh.  7  23. 

18.  mv]  NooM.  Misled  by  a  confusion  of  »  and  j,  a  scribe 
thought  the  well  known  Ijobp  was  meant  and  wrote  accord- 
ingly. There  is  no  reason  to  think  that  this  corresponded 
to  a  different  Heb.  original. 

19.  DtJTl]  >**oa..  Note  the  different  vocalization.  Neh.  7  22 
is  a  scribal  error  for  ysmoA*. 

20.  H:i]  y,^  is  partly  due  to  the  confusion  of  *  and  j  and 
partly  to  the  careless  omission  of  o.  As  in  2  18  it  is  not 
necessary  to  hypothecate  a  different  Heb.  original. 

22.  nsbi]  JLfl^oi.  This  vocalization,  as  in  Neh.  726  is  due 
to  the  absence  of  the  mater  lectionis  in  the  translator's 
Heb.  Ms. 

25.  nnj;  n''1p]  ^;:i^  ^.^;aj».  This  was  originally  v^^w.  A 
scribe  has  carelessly  written  j  for  -  both  here  and  in  Neh.  7  29. 


VERSION  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  EZRA  25 

S.  presents  here  (in  the  original)  the  correct  reading.  MT's 
reading  is  due  to  carelessness.  GAB  and  Neh.  7  29  both  bear 
witness  with  2  25  that  MT  must  here  be  corrected. 

V^ti^  ni*ism].  The  printed  Syriac  texts  here  have  a  wrong 
division  of  these  words  as  >&JxalQ.7r:ao  which  were  originally, 
of  course,  'ft^a*  loU^ao  as  Neh.  729.  Thorndyke's  Mss.  read 
this  also. 

26.  n1^^tt  tl^^]  ij  vist^a,.  This  is  a  scribal  error  due  to  the 
preceding  verse.    Cf.  vss.  10,  15,  and  Neh.  730. 

28.  "'J^m]  wCiwo.  S.  omits  the  article  in  proper  names  as  do 
the  English  versions. 

30.  ty''!i;iD]  Ar^^.  This  is  due  to  a  scribal  confusion  of 
»a  and  J. 

31.  in«].    S.  omits. 

33.  nnn]  ijj^o.    This  mistake  of ;  and  *  is  due  to  a  copyist. 
lilfc^l]  CLi-lo.     This  is  as  Neh.  737;  the  difference  is  due  to 
a  copyist. 

37.  IJ^H]  ^aoL  S.  writes  as  in  740  with  different  vocaliza- 
tion, but  in  I.  Chr.  912,  2414,  r»l 

^bi^]  +  ^U»«.  This  addition  is  due  to  the  influence  of  the 
following  verse. 

38.  nyntS^I  D-iJ^ni^]  JLiAvio  ,-A:i3Ao.  This  is  due  to  careless- 
ness. 

39.  Din]  >B©;jw.  S.  writes  with  a  different  vocalization. 
Cf.  vss.  15,  22,  30. 

40.  ^«''D1p1]  JLaotJBo.  The  omission  of  "^  here  is  due  to 
the  carelessness  of  a  scribe.  In  Neh.  7  43  this  word  is  cor- 
rectly written. 

'^^:ib]  ..^o.  Both  MT  and  S.  are  here  corrupt.  The  original 
Heb.  had  the  proper  name  ''lli:?^.   Cf.  vs.  6. 

iTmn]  JLjoo,  =  nmn.  S.  agrees  here  with  the  k're  of 
Neh.  743.    (So  also  in  39-) 

41.  DnifiS^DH]  ,e^saA»}  ^ci  =  D^nitS^en.    MT  is  correct. 


26     A  CRITICAL  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  PESHITTA 

42.  D^l^l^n]  '^uk^;!.  This  is  a  copyist's  error  for  JLc^U. 
Cf.  vs.  40  for  opposite  mistake  in  writing  final  ^.  The 
translator  took  this  word  for  a  proper  name.  This  accounts 
for  the  addition  of  the  copula  to  the  following  *aa. 

]i:htsi\  va>tV  This  is  due  to  a  copyist's  interchanging  of 
letters. 

y(pV]  •aaft:w.  As  in  Neh.  745,  the  copyist's  error  is  due 
to  dittography.  The  mistake  was  easily  made,  as  lIpV''  is  a 
more  familiar  name  than  llpj?. 

«tt'>tDn]  JL^ai^.  S.  writes  the  word  with  different  vocalization. 

43.  ^<^^S]  jLuuj.  This  is  evidently  a  copyisfs  error  for  the 
original  JU^j  as  in  careless  writing  they  look  so  much  alike. 
Cf.  Neh.  745  where  h*J  occurs. 

WSItyn]  Jbutojw.  S.  writes  with  a  different  vocalization.  Cf.  242. 
The  confusion  of  o  and  «s  is  due  to  a  copyist. 

44.  fc^nV'D]  JL*.    This  is  a  copyist's  error  for  the  original 


D*\p]  »eo^.  This  is  the  result  of  a  copyist's  confusion  of 
?  and  5. 

]ns]  v«f»-  This  is  ,the  result  of  a  copyist's  confusion  of 
;  and  i. 

45.  nili^]  j-fca,V.  This  is  evidently  a  copyist's  error  for  the 
original  jia^  and  is  due  to  a  confusion  of  *  and  i. 

^)pV]  aoa:^.    Cf.  vs.  42  for  the  same  confusion  of  a  and  «. 

46.  ^^fitS^]  i^ao:^^.    So  also  MT  k're  and  Neh.  7  48. 

47.  hl^]  ^fc^.  This  is  the  result  of  copyist's  confusion  of 
)  and  V 

■^Hi]  ;^^.  As  in  Neh.  7  49,  this  transposition  of  consonants 
is  due  to  a  copyist. 

rrifc^l]  i-.lj.  This  is  due  to  a  copyist's  confusion  of  ♦  and  ». 
Cf.  the  worse  confusion  in  Neh.  7  50,  1*1  for  J-i». 

48.  Y^*\]  vo^j.  As  in  Neh.  7  50,  the  j  is  a  copyist's  error, 
but  the  punctation  is  truly  Aramaic. 


VERSION  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  EZRA  27 

«11pi]  liftaj.  Here  is  a  confusion  of  i  and  1,  as  well  as  of 
M  and  o,  with  a  good  Semitic  name  as  the  result.  In  Neh. 
7  50  the  name  appears  as  lia*?. 

49.  riDS]  *a;K«.  This  is  due  to  a  confusion  of  «  with  I. 
•'DD]  wfta.     This  is  due  to  a  confusion  of  i  with  -. 

50.  HiDK]  U*of.  This  is  due  to  a  confusion  of  i  with  *. 
D'^iipo]  ^uKm.  This  is  due  to  a  confusion  of  ^  with  K 
D^D''Bi]  ^^AflDOAi.    S.  reads  as  does  MT  k're. 

51.  llPlin]  ;aA*jju.  This  is  due  to  a  confusion  of  j  with  ?. 
Cf.  Neh.  7  53  where  Ioa^jju*  is  due  to  an  aural  error. 

52.  ^TTllO]  lpuu».  This  is  probably  due  to  a  confusion  of  i 
with  ;;  but  several  Heb.  mss.  read  WI'TTD  both  here  and  in 
Neh.  754. 

53.  DIpIS]  «flDajBfj».   This  is  due  to  a  confusion  of*  with  a. 
non]   ^aoaol.     As  in  Neh.  756,  this  is  due  to  the  careless 

writing  of  a  scribe. 

54.  NS'^on]  U*i^.  This  is  due  to  a  different  vocalization 
which  GB  also  has. 

55.  niy]  fa^.  This  is  due  to  the  omission  of  *  and  the 
confusion  of  n  with  ;. 

HdVk^]  y»AA  ujla.  The  *aA  is  a  mistake.  The  translator  took 
nnj;  and  noVty  as  two  names  as  in  vs.  58.  Neh.  7  60  S.  =  MT  -= 

v<UftAA   wfSkX   ujb. 

^tDD]  yi>.^£n.     The  >*  is  due  to  the  preceding  >wX». 
niBOn]  Io;a*dI.     This  is  due  to  a  different  vocalization. 

56.  n^VT  ilL*  The  5w  is  omitted  by  haplography  as  in  Neh. 
758  and  U^-^A  »**»  comes  from  vs.  57. 

]1pm]  ^5UB^1.     The  I  is  a  copyist's  error  for  ?. 

57.  iT'toStJ^  ^in]  is  omitted  here  and  transposed  to  vs.  56. 
b^t^n]  ^a4-A..     This  is  due  to  a  different  vocalization. 
niDB]  lofjBA.     This  is  due  to  a  confusion  of  «  and  o  and 

to  a  different  vocalization. 

D">n2in]  l^i:Suu^  via.     The  translator  took  "2Jn  not  as  a  name 


28     A  CRITICAL  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  PESHITTA 

but  as  a  noun   and  wrongly  connected  it  with  J<3S  whose 
plural  is  m«32J.     Neh.  759  ^o^  uia;  GB  dIoI  AcJepcoeiv;  GA 
omits  and  reads:  uioi,  and  as  usual  translates  literally. 
1fi«]  ^jol  is  a  copyist's  error  for  original  usol, 

58.  nD'?Ly  niV]  y^>^«  f^^.  Cf.  note  on  vs.  55.  The  trans- 
lator wrongly  takes  as  two  separate  names. 

59.  rOQ  hT\]  J\**>ft\,l.  This  is  due  to  a  transposition  of  con- 
sonants. 

fc^K^in  br\]  J^%\,)^.  The  translator  mistook  these  words  and 
prefixed  ^  =  place  to  which;  then  took  «tthn  as  the  Ara- 
maic word  S^in  for  "forest"  =  J^a^,  together  making  Jb.^iA. 
to  'Tel-'Aba".  Evidently  the  translator  knew  nothing  of 
the  geography  of  this  region. 

nilD]  i4a;aiA.o.  Again  the  translator  takes  this  as  a  place 
to  which  and  prefixed  '^  as  well  as  the  copula  "and".  He 
reads  a  different  vocalization  and  a  scribe  has  added  * 
making  what,  to  him,  was  a  familiar  name. 

1D«  ]1«]  ("from)  Addan,  Immer"]  polll  ^j..o,]  "then  it  was 
reported".  As  in  Neh.  761,  S.  takes  these  names  for  a 
clause.  The  mistake  was  easy  to  make  as  the  translator 
thought  in  Aramaic  and  when  his  eye  caught  these  words 
he  carelessly  translated  as  above.  Cf.  his  careless  translation 
of  IBDD  in  vs.  2. 

C3«]  ?  v^  J".  S.  translates  MT's  "whether"  by  "except  that 
(they  were  of  Israel)."  In  MT  it  is  questionable  whether  these 
Exiles  were  of  the  stock  of  Israel;  in  S.  the  only  question 
is  their  ability  to  show  a  certificate  of  birth. 

60.  fc?Tlpi]  JL^ju.  This  is  due  to  a  scribe's  confusion  of  1 
and  5  and  to  a  different  vocalization. 

61.  D^iHDH  ''in»1].    S.  omits. 

W*^  i****'  A  copyist  has  carelessly  transposed  the  con- 
sonants. 

62.  1«2JDi]  ojuaaI  =  IWSD. 


VERSION  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  EZRA  29 

D^tS^rr'n^n  DiriD]  v»*«b^f*j  ILaK&d.  Here  are  free  but  good 
translations,  and,  in  no  way,  presuppose  a  different  Hebrew 
original. 

63.  «nt5^inn]  ^^l^xo^l,  JL^-v.  This  is  an  unsuccessful  attempt 
to  explain  a  Persian  word  (tirsatha)  which  the  translator 
did  not  know.  More  than  700  years  intervened  between 
Ezra  and  the  translator  and  the  Persian  terms  for  office  were 
entirely  unknown  to  him.  The  plural  form  of  the  verb  is 
necessited  by  Jjuv.   Cf  Neh.  7  65  where  this  word  is  rendered 

pD]  JLa?  jitHj>.  Here,  as  in  Esd.,  "the  high  priest"  is  an 
interpretative  translation. 

D^Din^l  Dm«^]  luao  ^U*o  "and  he  shall  inquire  and  deter- 
mine (lit.  see)".  Here  a  paraphrase  of  the  terms  Urim  and 
Thummim  is  given  by  the  translator  as  the  original  signific- 
ance of  these  terms  was  unknown  to  the  popular  reader. 

65.  MT  nmfiyoi  DniiyD  nrh)]  "and  their  singjers  male  and 
female".    S.  vo^il.  ^juoam;  \oe»Aiiuaitaeo  "and  their  servants  who 

were    serving    them "     This   mistake   arose   from   the 

similarity  of  the  words  D'»1*1tyo  and  D^nityiD. 

6S.  IDIplD-^j;  n^iSVnb  DN"l!?«n  r\>^b  minn  =  they  gave  free 
will  offerings  for  the  house  of  God  to  establish  it  upon  its  site. 
S.  \ooi2kjuua  ooeto  oaoAo  .jLpD;  {Kxa^.  oa^wiU  b=  they  planned 
together  for  the  house  of  the  Lord;  and  then  rose  up  and 
did  bravely.    S.  paraphrases  here  but  not  correctly. 

DNn'p^n]  Ui»  Cf.  15,38,9. 

69.  D''i1DD11]  Jioa^v;.     S.  gives  the  Persian  equivalent. 
\^\i^]  Kaa  is  less  usual  than  Ka. 

fp2)],    S.  omits  o  before  JLAma. 

70.  111^.''.]  oaaoi.  The  matres  lectionis  not  appearing  in  the 
ms.,  our  translator  read  U^; ;  then  he  added  «  to  the  words 
''singers  and  porters". 


30     A  CRITICAL  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  PESHITTA 

DiT'^V^]  vottpvoAo.    The  o  is  evidently  a  mistake  for  o. 

+  oo«t  ^K^j  ^Jo].    A  comparison  of  MT  und  S.  shows 
in  translation  the  following: 

MT.  S. 

"The  priests  and  levites, 
and  (the  rest)  of  the  people, 
and  the  singers,  and  porters 
and  the  Nethinim  dwelt  in 
their  cities,  even  all  Israel 
in  their  cities."^ 


"So  the  priests  and  levites  and 
a  part  of  the  people  and  part 
of  the  servants  and  part  of  the 
porters  and  the  Nethinim  and 
those  who  were  dwelling  in 
their  cities  returned;  and  all 
Israel  in  their  cities^^ 
MT  is  certainly  corrupt  as  it  stands.  S.  tried  to  remedy 
the  reading  with  the  above  result. 


I  Dittography.     (S.  corrected  as  above. 


VERSION  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  EZRA  31 


CHAPTER  III 

1.  D^tt^n'«"!?«]  yiliAioIX  >ftm>iN.  MT  has  the  people  already 
at  Jerusalem.  In  S.  the  people  gather  at  some  undefined 
place  "to  go  up  to  Jerusalem".  This  does  not  imply  that 
S.  had  a  Heb.  original  different  from  that  of  our  MT.  S.  pre- 
sents here  simply  a  paraphrastic  element  in  the  translation. 

2.  ^^TI^Ktt^]  V»IK^.  S's  reading  is  a  copyist's  mistake  for 
>^)b^U.    Cf.  3  8,  5  2  for  a  similar  error. 

D'»n'?«n-t5^'««]  I6,i5^!  JL*=u.  As  in  I  Chr.  23  14  und  II  Chr.  3016 
S.  renders  the  MT  "man  of  God"  by  "prophet  of  God". 
Cf.  Dt.  33  I  und  Jos.  14  6  where  the  same  phrase  is  rendered 
in  S.  by  lojSs.,  o»yai.. 

3.  nnt»n  )^''y)]  Ua^a.  ^U?o.  S.  translated  freely  by  a  pas- 
sive. 

nj0''81]  IKa;  libCu*j.  S.  brings  out  the  force  of  the  strong 
nfifc<  but  disregards  the  preposition  2. 

ninHT]]  iJbobfaaa  ^pa^;.  S.  gives  a  correct  paraphrastic 
translation. 

Ipn^  n)hV]  ^^j^  i*^^^.  S.  has  the  singular;  but  whether 
this  is  due  to  the  translator  or  to  a  copyist  who  altered  the 
pi.  lloSfe^  by  carelessly  copying,  we  do  not  know. 

4.  nbv]  '1«^^.  Cf.  vs.  3.  Here  S.,  the  Greek  versions 
and  several  Heb.  mss.  have  the  plural.  This  seems  to  be 
preferable. 

6.  T\)hV]  11^:^.  Cf.  on  vs.  3. 


32     A  CRITICAL  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  PESHITTA 

HD''  «^]  fSAsas,^^  ^  ^^  h»r^.  Mt  represents  the  temple  as 
not  yet  begun,  "the  foundation  was  not  laid;"  S.  represents 
the  work  as  "not  yet  completed". 

7.  Dn:?'?"!  D^ilS^]  JUif>ji>-o  JLvo^.   S.  transposes  the  order. 
«1B^  n^'b^]  JLfloA.  Jjifcxa.    S.  translates  "by  the  sea  to  Joppa" 

freely  but  well.   Cf.  II  Chr.  2  15. 

8.  D\n^«n]  JL>poj.    Cf.   15,  268. 
D!?t5^n^^]  >Aa4o^j.     Cf.   I  3,  4. 

I^nn]  ijA.  S.  is  obviously  an  error  for  the  original  -^»  =  MT. 
The  »  was  confused  with  ;  and  then  to  make  a  Syriac  word  ♦ 
was  added. 

D'«inDn]  lvJ»aao.  The  addition  of  o  is  due  to  a  misunder- 
standing of  S. 

nsi^]  JbociAa  loo»ia^.  In  rendering  the  Mt  "to  superintend" 
by  "to  be  by  the  day",  the  translator  wrongly  reads 
for  ngi^  which,  in  the  unpointed  text,  was  written  with  the 
same  radicals,  viz:  n^jb  "in  perpetuo",  "daily". 

9.  Vnsi  Vi^]  wotoiLao  «o,aj;:lo.  S.  changes  the  order  as 
in  vs.  7. 

^«^0*7p]  Uaojjio.  This  is  due  to  a  careless  scribe  who 
omitted  the  final  ^  as  in  240. 

miH''  ''in]  i-j«o»  uiao.  S.  has  preserved  this  name  better 
than  MT.    Cf.  2  40. 

n^i^V'bV  ^"^^b]  ^ya.^  voooMj.    S.  translates  MT  "to  superinted 
the  doing  (of  the  work)"  by  "who  were  doing"  because  of 
his  misunderstanding  Ti'^^b  in  vs.  8. 
.  JT'ni]  oiiuka;.    This  is  merely  a  free  translation. 

D\n^«n]  JL#jo,.     Cf.   I  5,  2  68,  3  8. 

Ilin]  Moi.  The  confusion  of  j  and  i  is  due  to  a  copyist; 
but  the  interchange  of  H  and  n  doubtless  goes  back  to  the 
translator. 

10.  D-'inn]  JiAiaj.  The  MT  "the  builders"  is  rendered  in  S. 
"of  the   building".     This   is   not   correct.     One   might  think 


VERSION  OF  THE  b60K  OF  EZRA  33 

the   original   read  Jjoaj  «=  MT;   but  this  would  involve  the 
change  of  position  of  J^uia  which  should  come  directly  after 

n^PJ!;3]  wa*o.  S.  translates  MT  "and  they  stationed"  by 
"and  they  rose  up".  S's  reading  (H^J^'^)  agrees  with  several 
Heb.  Mss.  as  well  as  with  the  Greek  versions  and  doubt- 
lessly represents  the  original. 

ni12J2Jni]  ^b>a  ^Ao  Iffajj  IKiiJi  ^r***^**  S.  here  freely  renders 
MT's  "with  trumpets"  by  "and  holding  rams'  horns  and 
blowing  them". 

D^n'?:}^!]  I^«iaxjia.  S.  renders  the  MT's  "with  trumpets"  by 
"with  cymbals".  But  S.  hardly  had  a  different  Heb.  original. 
Cf.  proceeding  note. 

11.  minni  hhn^  li^l]  liuLOJtKao.  JiojoKa  aj»^o.  S.  renders 
freely  but  well. 

nyiin]  JLaAoa.  This  is  a  mistake  in  Lee's  text  for  J^^n>-> 
(Walton). 

'IDin]  i:^!L9«*.  True  to  the  idea  expressed  in  vs.  6,  MT's 
laying  of  the  foundation  of  the  temple  is  S's  "completion"  of 
the  same. 

12.  '•tJ^i^ll]  MjL»>-.     S.  carelessly  omits  the  copula. 

)'in''2  jl^Win  rT'in-riK]  Uao^  Jla;  «,;juAa  jio,  iK*a>L..  S.  renders 
MT's  "the  first  house,  when  its  foundation  was  laid"  by 
"this  house  in  its  great  former  honor"  (=ni53);  and  pro- 
bably has  alone  of  all  the  versions  preserved  an  original 
reading.    Cf.  Bewer  p.  46. 

HDO]  *.a*^  ^.     Cf.  vs.  II. 

nnoty^]  {lo^juoo.  S.  reads  the  copula  with  Esd.  which  is 
the  correct  reading.  MT  should  be  changed  to  read  nnDfi^ai 
accordingly. 

13.  nriDtyn].    This  is  omitted  by  S.  through  oversight. 

3 


34     A  CRITICAL  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  PESHITTA 


b\pTi)]  JLxaaj  |Loo.    Cf.  translation  of  MT  and  S.  following: 


MT 
"And  the  people  could  not 
distinguish  the  sound  of  the 
shout  of  joy  from  the  sound 
of  the  people's  weeping;  be- 
cause the  people  were  shout- 
ing a  great  shout  and  the 
sound  was  heard  for  a  long 
distance." 

Both  MT   and   S.  are   confused   because  the  Hebrew  is 
corrupt. 


S. 
"And  the  people  could  not 
hear  the  sound  of  the  trum- 
pets, because  the  people  were 
blowing  the  trumpets  with 
a  loud  noise,  and  the  sound 
of  weeping  was  heard  for  a 
long  distance." 


VERSION  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  EZRA  35 


CHAPTER  IV 

2.  ni2i]  ^ju.  a\  jiaa.  S.  brings  out  the  meaning  freely  but 
correctly  by  rendering  "we  also  will  build". 

tymi]  jiaj.  S.  repeats  *'we  will  build";  but  this  a  copyist's 
error  for  Jb^aji  =  t^MTi^. 

D'Tllt  Uni«  »b)]  jLai«i  v.*^',a?  ••j^i^^.  S.  had  the  same  read- 
ing as  K're,  i.  e.  1^1  for  «Vl  and  freely  and  pointedly  adds 
"here,"  evidently  meaning  these  "enemies"  also  had  been  in 
the  habit  of  worshipping  Jahweh  at  Jeruscdem, 

]imD«]  o^;jyuua.  This  reading  of  "Sennacherib"  for  "Esar- 
haddon"  by  no  means  makes  the  presupposition  of  a  diffe- 
rent underlying  text  necessary.  Sennacherib,  the  father  of 
Esarhaddon,  was  more  familiar  to  the  translator  than  his 
son,  and  the  misreading  may  therefore  have  been  quite  ac- 
cidental. 

3.  \\^.    S.  freely  adds.    Cf.  note  on  i  i. 

l^on].  S.  omits  as  does  G.  and  Esd.:  MT  should  be 
corrected  accordingly;  for  "king  Cyrus  king  of  Persia"  is 
evidently  redundant. 

4.  }>1«n  Dy]  Usa:^.  The  MT  "people  of  the  land",  i.  e, 
common  people,  seems  always  to  denote  a  contrast  with 
Israel,  "the  chosen  people".  Originally  the  phrase  meant 
the  native  races  of  Palestine  and  later  the  heathen.  The 
irony  of  MT  is  lost  by  S.  which  freely  renders  "peoples". 
Cf.  3  4   where    this   phrase   is  also  paraphrased.     9 1   shows 

3* 


36     A  CRITICAL  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  PESHITTA 

clearly  the  significance  of  the  phrase  as  meaning  "heathen"; 
S.  here  renders  "people  of  the  provinces"  which  brings  out 
the  exact  meaning. 

niiaV]     >;uai  Jlj.    This  is  a  free  but  good  translation. 

5.  D"»^5^V]  ila^:^j».  This  is  evidently  a  copyisfs  error  in  S. 
for  the  original  U^jo  =  t^'^^VX^,  Thorndyke  in  Walton  sug- 
gests |Jl»o1>b. 

IJ^I]  iaoj^,  without  the  copula. 

6.  tyn"ltyn«]  iaiao  **Aju*l.    Cf.  note  on  i  i. 

nitoty]  iu^.  In  the  sense  of  accusation  K>-^  does  not 
occur  elsewhere.  It  is  therefore  most  likely  that  the  trans- 
lator wrote  in^  ==  MT  which  a  copyist  corrupted  to  Ju^. 

7.  oVtyS]  >i:i«a  ^Uo.  S.  completely  misunderstood  this  name 
and  took  it  as  the  noun  ^:Sjfc  with  the  preposition  o  stand- 
ing pregnantly  for  yAjta  ^jL»  =  ke  sahited. 

miMD]  l»jb»>».  The  confusion  of  «  and  j  and  is  due  to  a 
scribe.    Cf  i  8  where  the  same  error  occurs. 

8.  The  section  from  48—618  is  in  Aramaic. 

DVt3]  i^*^^  which  in  49,  17,  23  is  written  i-i»^  but  in 
each  instance  appears  to  be  a  mistake  for  j-ao^  which  we 
must  read  in  all  cases.  (So  also  Payne  Smith,  Thesaurus 
SyriacuSy  col.  1431).  In  view  of  the  persistent  mistake  it 
may,  however,  be  suggested  that  Ns^^  is  really  Tdyp.a,  al- 
though this  is  ordinarily  written  i>»sajt.  In  4 18  DJ^tD  is  trans- 
lated by  Jw^t »!  =  8tdtay|ia. 

••U^Dty]  lAMjb].  Without  the  final  yodh  occurs  also  in  49,  17,  23. 

i^ttiD]  JLfiDOMA  y\.  This  is  a  wrong  translation  which  con- 
nects fc^Di  with  jxDoafu. 

9.  i^^DriDISfc^l]  J^fAfolo.  The  nature  of  the  officials  repre- 
sented by  MT  is  uncertain.  S.  gives  an  interpretation.  Mar- 
quart  (cf  notes  in  Bertholet*s  "Esra  und  Nehemia"  p.  15) 
argues  for  S's  reading  (fc<''*lBD). 


VERSION  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  EZRA  37 

«^^B1to]  JLxa;^  stands  for  the  original  ).Aa;.i.  A  scribe  has 
omitted  the  V. 

^13"1«]  j-uav^     This  shows  a  confusion  of  wa  and  o. 

10.  ISiDfc^]  t^AJBol.  This  is  due  to  a  confusion  of  ?  and  « 
and  the  transposition  of  the  a  corrupted  to  >;  originally  it 
was  r^usol. 

Ti'^^p!!]  JLvona.  S.  reads  "in  the  cities  of  (the  province  of) 
Samaria".  Cf.  H.  Kings  1724.  This  is  better  than  MT. 
G«S. 

1«t5^1].   S.  omits. 

niV31]  Ki2k-D?o.  This  transliteration  shows  that  the  trans- 
lator did  not  understand  this  word  which  the  Aramaic 
papyri  from  Elephantine  show  was  the  regular  particle  (also 
written  n^D  and  |V3)  to  introduce  the  matter  of  a  letter 
after  the  greeting.  It  should  be  translated  "to  proceed"  or 
"further".  Obviously  it  did  not  originally  occur  in  this  verse; 
as  it  stands,  it  is  a  copyist's  mistake  brought  in  from  the 
following  verse  (cf.  Payne  Smith,  T/ies.  Syr  under  <>a  col.  1 790 : 
"Pro  njjjis  I.  Esd  IV.  10,  II  extat  in  Polygl.  ^4^1  sed  codd. 
Poc.  et  Uss.  in  V.  10  exhibent  ^-^  y-i,  in  v.  11  h,M^l  Valet 
voc.  Chald.  niJJ3  sic,  ita,  et  caeterUy  sed  pro  nom.  prop, 
habuisse  videtur  Syrus.")  Both  MT  and  S.  must  be  cor- 
rected by  omitting  this  word.  Cf.  Vulg.  *'in  pace";  G.  rightly 
omits. 

11.  niV^I]  K.iij»lo.  Cf.  note  on  vs.  10.  Here  this  word  is 
used  correctly. 

12.  •»1W1]  «iMvaAo  with  suffix  =  G. 
^'•lywi]  oM^tKjto  with  suffix  =  G. 

13.  ]5^D]  Jiaoi.  Cf  note  on  vs.  10.  Again  S.  misunderstood 
this  word. 

pni*^  «^  tiSm  l^n  rnifi]  ^  ^^^  \l\^.  S.  paraphrases  MTs 
"tribute,  custom,  or  toll  they  will  not  give"  by  "there  will 


38     A  CRITICAL  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  PESHITTA 

be  no  tribute  for  thee".  This  paraphrase  omits  1^1  and  '«J^n 
which  the  translator  apparently  did  not  understand.  iVl  is 
the  Assyrian  biltu\  "JJ^n  does  not  occur  in  Biblical  Hebrew. 
Cf.  GAB.  cpopoi  o()K  ecsovrat  (Soi  =  S.  It  looks  as  if  S.  and 
G.  had  read  ^  «inV  kV  (cf.  Bewer  ad  loc.) 

pUnn  D-iD^tt  DnB«1]  ^jl  JI  ^A»  ^o,  «Io.  S.  again  para- 
phrases MT  =  ''and  the  royal  taxation  will  suffer  damage" 
by  "neither  will  she  (2.  e.  the  city)  recognize  kings"  i.  ^.  ^^t  ^l 
for  Dnsi<  which  has  been  a  source  of  conjecture  from  the 
earliest  time  of  scientific  criticism.  The  best  reading  is  DnB«. 
The  Greek  versions  did  not  know  the  meaning  of  this 
word  either,  ptinri  is  then  very  freely  translated,  although 
S.  knew  its  meaning  quite  well,  cf  vs.  15. 

14.  ]V3]  V>A»o.    Cf  note  in  vss.  10,  n,  13. 
«Di>»^].    S.  omits. 

15.  ISDn  Mpy^]  ofto  \;j,l.  For  MT's  "let  search  be  made 
in  the  book",  S.  has  "do  thou  read  the  book". 

innifi^«1]  JLa-fo;  JLio&^lo.    S.  renders  freely.     Cf  note  on  i  i. 

16.  nnitS^I]  omvo*.    S.  and  GB  follow  the  K'thib  =  cf  vs.  12. 
pb>n]  U^o*.     S.  renders  MT's  "part"  by  **rule".     This  is 

a  free  but  good  translation. 

17.  S.  connects  vss.  16  and  17  by  •,  the  copula. 
••tfi^OB^I]  tuua*  I«^o.    S.  carries  over  the  force  of  h)^, 
It^i^l]    ^a:^)L»;  jLafA  Io:s-«.     This  is  due  to  the  force  of  ^y 

as  above. 

nj;3]  occurs  elsewhere  as  fliV^  cf  vss.  10,  11.  S.  reads 
^iAJo  ^  and  connects  with  vs.  18.  J^^^oao  ^  "when  it  arrives", 
represents  a  mere  conjecture  on  the  part  of  the  translator. 
Cf  vss.  10,  13. 

18.  «^''^J^]  -1«^.  S.  renders  correctly  and  naturally  "to 
me",  i.  e,  the  king. 

••Ip]  opft.    S.  renders  a  passive  by  3  pi.  active. 


VERSION  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  EZRA  39 

19.  Ilpiai]  ofj»o.    Cf.  note  on  vs.  15. 
innty«1]  JLai  UoKj»1o.    Cf.  vs.  15. 

MT  "and  tribute,  toll,  and  custom  was  paid  them".  S.  "and 
for  the  former  kings  they  had  no  regard  at  all".  S.  here 
departs  from  MT  in  a  radical  manner.  When  we  compare 
this  verse  with  vs.  13,  we  see  that  the  same  difficulty  was 
found  with  the  loan  word  1^2  (biltu)  but  mitt  was  under- 
stood, while  1^1  (not  found  in  Biblical  Hebrew)  caused  dif- 
ficulty. Here  the  translator  who  did  not  know  the  correct 
rendering  has  done  the  best  he  could  and  paraphrased. 

21.  jVO]  ^^.    Cf.  vs.  14. 

22.  )bli^l    S.  omits. 

]ote]  J  A\b\..  Probably  the  plural  sign  was  carelessly 
omitted  by  a  copyist. 

23.  n-ltt]  III  jj».  *'When  it  (the  letter)  came."  This  is  a 
free  but  good  translation. 

Dim]  +  i^iHsi  '^^^.  With  GL,  S.  alone  preserves  the  ori- 
ginal text.  The  title  DV13"^3^3  must  be  inserted  in  the  Aramaic. 
Cf.  vss.  8,  9,  17. 

JinniiDI]  vooil«u»N  v^f  y,^:  S.  renders  MT's  "their  com- 
panions" by  "and  before  those  who  were  their  equals"  as 
in  vs.  7- 

1^t«]  ^)l  ^t-oi.    S.  renders  freely. 


40     A  CRITICAL  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  PESHITTA 


CHAPTER  V 

«'>«">3i]  JLiai.  S.  has  quite  grammatically  "Haggai  the  pro- 
phet and  Zechariah  the  son  of  Iddo  the  prophet".  This  is 
certainly  better  than  MT  and  it  may  present  the  original 
text.  The  alternative  is  to  follow  Esd.  in  omitting  n«"'^i 
after  ''Iin. 

3.  '»it11  "intS^  v>*^*^'.  This  is  due  to  a  confusion  of  ?  and 
i  and  to  the  omission  of  final  >  which  in  the  translator's  Ms. 
may  not  have  been  written.  S.  quite  correctly  writes  the 
names  as  one  word. 

DhV]  jUfa^o  >j»ei\..  S.  freely  adds  "and  to  the  rest",  inter- 
preting MT's  "to  them"  as  applying  only  to  the  leaders,  i.  e. 
Zerubbabel  and  Jeshua. 

n^batS^]  AMpaX.  This  is  a  free  but  good  translation. 
Cf.  4  16. 

4.  «lDiD]  JL«aa*j  yX.    Cf  note  on  48. 

«i*lDN]  opdI.  S.  and  G.  have  preserved  here  the  original 
text.     MT  must  be  emended  to  read  11D«. 

5.  Dnn^«]  IcS^.    S.  and  G.  omit  the  suffix. 

^^'l  iJLoL*.  S.  and  G.  translate  "elders  of"  by  "captivity 
of"  because  both  read  t5^  for  tS'. 

"IDil  ^^^5]  oVfr^.  The  translator  of  S.  omitted  the  pronoun 
and  translated  the  pa'el  as  pe'al.  MT  "they  did  not  compel 
them  to  stop";  S.  "they  did  not  stop". 


VERSION  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  EZRA  41 

6.  ''itU  intS^  ^jOAiKjkt.     Cf.  note  on  vs.  3. 
«''DD1£5«].    S.  omits. 

7.  «!?D].    S.  omits. 

8.  n''n^].    S.  omits. 

i^>hr02  DfcyniD  3;«1]  cswuajb  vs-^ub  It^axo  Ufiwo.  S.  freely 
renders  MT's  "and  wood  is  put  into  the  walls"  by  '^and 
many  transverse  beams  are  joined  together  in  its  walls". 

tfuA'  Vio  ua^ro  JLai  /jja^o  ^l.  S.  paraphrases  MT*s  "and  this 
work  is  done  diligently  and  prospers"  by. "and  great  works 
are  done  there;  and  the  great  work  (literally,  goes  up  and 
proceeds  to  the  top)  i  e.  is  progressing  well".  Note  fc<i"lSDN 
is  translated  here  by  iKavoi,  it  is  omitted  in  68,  but  in  612 
is  rendered  by  V,^>3  (quickly),  in  7  21  it  is  rendered  J^^i^^wiju* 
(zealously),  and  in  7  17,  26  by  i^Jb-j  (carefully). 

9.  fcODiD]  ji-aoio.  S.  here  (also  in  vs.  1 1)  correctly  translates 
this  word.    Esd.  omits.  GAB=  MT. 

10.  DB^]  {(HMt.  S.  and  G.  here  have  the  plural  But  this 
does  not  necessitate  a  different  Aramaic  original  =  nHDlS^. 

11.  J<5^1«1].  Omits.  S.  has  here  the  usual  form  i^io**  ?«^  = 
D^DK^n  NH^W.  It  is  possible  that  S.  has  here  preserved  the 
better  text  as  the  phrase  in  the  Persian  period  =  S. 

\^T^'1  X'^y\\  ^^••^kaj  Jioi  l^Aaj  JiAiap.  S.  is  paraphrastic  "and 
the  building  of  this  house  which  we*  are  building". 

%ni!l  2*1]  ^otoiAvoiQ.  S.  mistook  the  two  words  for  one,  i.  e, 
*»ni^?in'^  cf.  Dan.  5  I,  3. 

12.  ^in].  S.  omits. 

13.  Vn]  »co}.fii.  S.  correctly  calls  Cyrus  ICing  of  Persia. 
MT's  connotation  is  of  course  original,  King  of  Babylon,  is 
Cyrus's  title  also  in  the  cuneiform  inscriptions.  GAB  omit. 
Esd.  =  pacJiXeuovTOi;  Kopoo  X^P^?  BapuXcoviag. 

14.  n^JiiDUi]  -i-  jLa^s^. 

«^D\"1^]  Q^^Qi^.  Esd.  also  has  the  suffix  ^v  toj  ^aDtoO  vacu. 


42     A  CRITICAL  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  PESHITTA 

S's  oCi^*^  ^"i-iN  for  MX  ^nn  n  t^hynb  represents  a  free 
translation  rather  than  a  witness  of  a  different  Aramaic 
original. 

12ms^  i^nuLtL,    S.  has  a  confusion  of  o  and  ^. 

i:i\n^1]  AOM*.    S.  and  G.  read  singular. 

15.  nn«]  yLuo  Vi«lo.  S.  freely  renders  "and  bring  (and) 
place". 

«nb«].    S.  omits. 

16.  «n*?«  IT'S]  jioi  IK^a.  This  may  not  be  the  original 
Syriac  reading  but  a  scribal  corruption  of  J«»Sh.  Jbuo. 

17.  ^nnn  •'i  ntsn  «3^»"^i  «Vi:i  non]  ii^  v-a  k*n  ukia 

"^uoa;  j-aabDj.  MT's  "in  the  king's  treasury  there  which  is  in 
Babylon",  S.  renders  "in  the  records,  that  are  in  the  treasury 
of  the  kings  of  Babylon".  That  MT  here  is  not  the  ori- 
ginal text  Esd.  (fev  roi^  pacSiXiKoig  pipXiocpuXaKioic;  roO 
KDpioi)  patfiXecjoc;  rote;  fev  BapuXdbvv)  as  well  als  S.  bear  wit- 
ness. S.  presents  the  nearest  to  the  original  (perhaps  is 
original)  =  ^nn  n  t^D^D  ^  «ni:i  non  n  ^nson.  Cf  Bewer, 
ad  loc. 

■qn]  J  ==  -ii.  This  reading  is  also  in  several  Aram.  Mss.  and 
in  Esd.  G.  has  both.    S.  has  the  preferable  reading. 


VERSION  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  EZRA  43 


CHAPTER  VI 

1.  I'^nnnD  «ni:i  n  «nsD  n^nn  npni]  ii,^  k^^  k-/,  iJiK^  h^^,. 

S.  renders  MT's  "and  they  searched  in  the  hall  of  records 
where  the  treasures  were  laid  up"  by  "and  he  read  the  re- 
cords which  are  in  the  treasury".  S.  gives  a  paraphrastic 
translation,  keeping,  as  does  G.,  Darius  as  subject.  For  the 
translation  of  "Ipl  by  l;ja  cf.  4 15,  19. 

2.  nDHK^ni]  u*A»l«.    S.  keeps  the  same  subject  as  in  vs.  i. 
i<nDn«!l]  vJ^uajwia.    S.  here  preserves  the  original  form  of 

the  Persian  name.    Cf.  BDB. 

t^TW2^]  ll^r».  This  may  be  a  corruption  of  the  original 
llfA^a  which  a  copyist  misread  lKi.»j^aa,  as  a  result  of  this, 
«ni'''71D  after  "^^d::  was  omitted. 

n^nDl  nun]  JL,^,  *,<ve^.  MT  "(There  was  written)  in  it  a 
record".  S.  "(und  thus  was  written)  in  the  volume".  A  copyist 
has  inadvertently  written  JLsfij  for  j»tJ»oj. 

3.  D^tD  DtJ^]  j-aao  JLgdqma  yixo.     This  is  a  double  translation. 
oVtyiTl]  A*?oJLa  h^U  =  n^JtS^ITn-'''^.    So  read  several  Aram. 

mss.,  Esd.,  G.  and  Vulg.  This  is  the  original  text  and  MT 
must  be  corrected  accordingly. 

«n''l].  S.  omits,  as  do  Esd.  and  GL,  because  their  con- 
struction of  the  sentence  does  not  require  it. 

]''^i1D)D]  ^j.  This  manifestly  is  a  serious  scribal  mistake 
for  .e^fio  =  MT. 

I'niy]  ^v^^ftiw.    S.   corresponds    here   to   I.   Kings  62   and 


44     A  CRITICAL  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  PESHITTA 

apparently  represents  the  original.  MT  was  probably  occa- 
sioned by  the  proceeding  JTIt^. 

4.  "JJlTi]  jj^il.  It  is  not  likely  that  S.  had  a  different  Aramaic 
text.  Either  this  a  free  rendering  facilitated  by  the  (cor- 
rupt) reading  mn  which  S.  follows  or  it  is  a  scribal  correc- 
tion for  the  original  Jl^^ps. 

5.  -l^tilDini]  -h  JA*.    Cf  note  on  i  i. 
nVtS^ITn-n  «!?D\Tp].    S.  omits  through  oversight 

yomiljl^  yAAioiA]  JlLu«^.  S.  mistook  the  sense  and  translated 
MT's  "let  them  restore  and  let  it  (all)  come  to  the  temple 
which  is  in  Jerusalem,  to  its  place"  by  "and  they  restored 
(them)  and  they  came  to  their  places  to  the  temple  which 
is  in  Jerusalem".  S's  suffixes  are  naturally  correct,  but  that 
does  not  mean  that  S.  had  a  different  original  Aramaic 
from  MT.  voot&^oA-  and  \oo,illl  are  doublets,  of  which  the 
latter  is  secondary.  A  reader  who  missed  it  at  the  end 
inserted  it. 

nnni]  o\aa>*llQ.  S.  translates  MT's  "and  put  down"  by  "and 
they  assembled  them  together".  MT  is  not  correct,  but  S. 
translated  freely.  It  seems  most  likely  that  the  original  trans- 
lator wrote  the  imperfect  of  the  various  verbs  in  this  verse 
as  is  demanded  by  the  sense. 

6.  fc^-'JDIBW]  J^x\>.    S.  renders  freely. 

7.  snin"  nns  IJI]  U)^  0^0^:^,.  S.  translates  MT's  "that 
governor  of  the  Jews"  by  ''that  the  Jews  may  do  it".  Some 
commentators  would  omit  this  passage  in  MT  as  a  gloss. 
GB  omits,  but  GAL  follow  MT. 

•"^ib^]  l^^JLSuk  as  in  5  5.  S.  makes  good  sense:  "Leave  the 
work  of  the  house  of  God  alone  that  the  Jews  may  do  it 
and  also  (let  alone)  the  captivity  of  the  Jews  that  the  house 
of  God  may  be  built  upon  its  place."  It  is  not  probable, 
however,  that  S.  had  a  different  underlying  Aramaic. 


VERSION  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  EZRA  45 

ijl].    S.  omits. 

S.  renders  MT's  "what  you  shall  do  in  cooperation  with 
those  elders  of  the  Jews",  by  "take  care  that  you  do  not 
quarrel  with  the  captivity  of  the  Jews".    S.  paraphrases. 

i7»].    S.  omits. 

mo  n]  lUj^o.  MT  "out  of  the  King*s  revenues  which  are 
from  the  tribute  of  Abarnahara"  allows  the  Jews  to  have 
a  portion  "of  the  tribute"  while  S.  more  liberally  "of  the 
king's  revenues  and  the  tribute  which  (is  gotten)  in  Abar- 
nahara".    This  is  an  example  of  S's  free  rendering. 

«i1S)D«].    S.  omits. 

«^bnb  «^-'«1]  ^Ai"^^  >?••»*  1^  ^r^o.    S.  renders  freely. 

9.  ]ntS^)l  n{31]  ^Jlo|^.  yofja^l  l^  y^t^o  .^ttiX^  «dat  ^jo^;  ^«m«  S.  ren- 
ders MT's  ''and  what  they  need"  by  "and  give  them  what 
they  wish  and  do  not  let  anything  be  wanting  for  them". 
S.  has  here  not  only  a  doublet,  but  anticipates  also  the  verb, 
which  it  translates  again  after  the  catalogue. 

*ltt«lfiD]  ^fA»:  kjul.    This  is  a  free  but  good  translation. 

SiTflO]  ^KjkM  yoottu.  S.  translates  MT's  "causing  it  to  be 
given"  by  "let  them  bring  (or  they  shall  bring)".  This  is  a 
free  translation. 

10.  ]"'nin''i]  JiavoA.  MT  "incense"  by  "sacrifices"  is  a  free 
rendering. 

Xd'pID  >^nh]  l-a^  %^.  S.  freely  renders  "on  behalf  of  the 
king"  MT's  "for  the  life  of  the  king". 

MT  "and  let  him  be  crucified  and  fastened  on  it  (z.  e.  the 
beam)".  S.  "and  let  them  make  him  a  cross  and  crucify  him 
upon  it".    S.  is  a  full  and  free  rendering. 

12.  ]DIiy  n]  tojuofcN.     This  is  a  copyist's  error  for  ^a*J,. 

«l].     This  is  a  scribal  doublet. 

1:10'']  fja:vi.    MT  "he  shall  over  throw";  S.  "he  shall  dwell". 


46     A  CRITICAL  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  PESHITTA 

S.  presents  here  a  scribal  error  for  f^ft,^.  This  is  a  con- 
fusion of  ^  and  v^. 

n:}j;n^]  ^h.  S.  "that  he  quickly  perish".  A  scribe  wrote 
I  for  ^;  the  original  Syr.  was  jAivi. 

13.  ''itU  iniS^]  v^*^^^  This  is  always  so  written  in 
Ezra. 

"'•'l  ^yp^]  ?  yt»'  "Because"  is  rendered  by  S.  "the  thing 
that". 

HD'^D  tS^im].    S.  carelessly  omits. 

«DiD]  IxDOjftj  y^l.    S.  did  not  understand  this  word. 

14.  •'nb^J  fiuciA.  As  in  55,  67y  8.  S.  mistakes  fcy  for  Bf; 
in  59,  however,  S.  translates  correctly. 

)''iS]  ^^v.    S.  translates  freely. 

»)1V]  o*^.    Cf.  5  I. 

wntytS^nmsi]  K****.^;/,  jLxD«Mi  ^9.    S.  repeats  the  phrase. 

16.  Nm^!l]  JjocM.    S.  translates  freely. 

nnnn  nil  «n^«-n>n  riDin]  lu^j^  io,>fc.  a^j  >«,  ik^:^  nk.. 

MT  "the  dedication  of  this  house  of  God  with  joy";  S.  "the 
feast  for  this  house,  which  is  the  house  of  God,  with  joy". 
S.  gives  a  needless  repetition. 

17.  ni*7].    S.  omits. 

bi^'^^^'bybv  «''tDn^]  "^brto^l  uia,  \t^  a:mm^..  MT  "for  a 
sinoffering  for  all  Israel";  S.  "to  remit  the  sins  of  the 
Israelites".     S.  gives  a  free  but  good  translation. 

18.  Jinn:i^SS     and     linnp!?nfiS].      S.     renders     freely    by 

«n^«  riTnr^V]  ^«*S^j  IK^a,  n^jc^  \i..  S.  agrees  with  GL 
and  is  better  than  MT.  We  must  insert  therefore  in  the 
Aramaic  text  JT'i  before  «n^«. 

ntS^D  1&D  2T\D'D]  U«M;  jLxDaMj,  JL^K^a  c^^JLa;  y*\.  S.  renders 
freely.    Cf.  note  on  i  i. 

20.  HD^n  Itsntfi^'^l]  JL^i^a  1<m\  oi.^e.    S.  avoids  the  pregnant 


VERSION  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  EZRA  47 

Heb.  construction  "they  killed  the  passover"  by  "and  they 
killed  the  sheep  at  the  passover". 
DH^I]  \oo»^  <aU.    S.  renders  freely. 

21.  n^^:intt]  "^^a;  IKj^s^  «.  S.  adds  paraphrastically  "of 
Babylon". 

b^\]  Va.  MT  has  not  only  the  returned  exiles  but  also 
all  others  who  qualified;  S.  has  only  those  of  the  returned 
who  qualified. 

«n^«].    S.  omits  as  the  sense  did  not  seem  to  require  it. 

^Th]  )»^  aA.jaa^.  MT  "to  seek",  by  S.  "to  pray  before". 
This  is  a  free  rendering. 

22.  DM'p^n]  JL^i.  as  often  in  S.  cf.  I  6,  8,  3  8,  9. 


48     A  CRITICAL  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  PESHITTA 


CHAPTER  VII 

I.  n^fc^n]  +  ^o^.    S.  freely  expands. 

4-  '^^V]  -rsft».     This  is  a  copyist's  error  for  -i:^.    Cf.  Neh. 

12  19,  42. 

5.  "ItV^fc^]  »ii-kS^.  It  is  possible  that  this  name  was  pronounc- 
ed as  by  S. 

iy«nn  iriDH]  ho^.  MT  has  "Aaron,  the  high  priest".  S.  takes 
t2^i<in  with  the  next  word,  wrongly. 

nh^  «1tj;  «in]  j>i^.  Ua^  hoi  U^;.  MT,  "this  Ezra  went  up". 
S.  "Ezra  was  the  first  who  went  up".    Cf.  vs.  5. 

6.  IMD]  jjoxauw.    S.  renders  freely. 

JLp.,.  ini5^pn  ^D  is  translated  by  ia^j  luul,  (i^o»a».  nVT-T3 
V^V  ^"'H^*^  is  represented  by  JLfAo,  <iimnvn">  y5i.on.  This  is  strange, 
for  in  vs.  9  S.  translates  this  phrase  correctly.  JL.pB;  otmovn-> 
suggests  that  the  translator  mistook  niiT'-'T'D  for  nin"«  mn 
and  further  ^oa  suggests  that  he  took  the  ^7  of  l^DH  as 
a  verb.  S.  =  "the  favor  to  walk  in  the  law  of  the  Lord 
as  he  wished". 

7.  Dmtfi^Dni]  jUiaajM  ^^«t.  S.  omits  1  and  translates  D^nnfiytsn 
v.  15.     cf  note  on  241. 

DnvtS^ni]  Kvl  «•.    MT  "and  the  porters";  S.  "and  some  of 
the  porters".     This  is  merely  a  free  rendering. 
nb^)r  b»]  +  <ui^^,  ^A-/  «•.    S.  adds  freely. 


VERSION  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  EZRA  49 

8.  «n'»1]  olio  =  1«n"»"l,  so  also  3  Heb.  mss.,  GAB  and  Vulg. 
MT  in  Vss.  8—9  considers  Ezra  as  subject  and  so  uses  the 
singular;  the  versions  regard  the  exiles  as  subject  and  so 
use  the  plural. 

9.  in«3].    S.  omits. 

TD^  Kin]  a»;A.  S.  uses  pi.  as  in  vs.  8  q.  v.;  but  had  no 
different  original  text. 

«D]  oil.    Cf.  note  on  vs.  8. 

r*?V  nrntDH  Vn^«-n"'D]  v««i^  ^Uh  '•^5  lr*l  y*l.  MT  "Ac- 
cording to  the  good  hand  of  his  God  upon  him".  S.  "ac- 
cording to  the  hand  of  God  which  prospered  them".  Both 
MT  and  S.  consistently  carry  out  their  preferences  begun 
in  vs.  8. 

10.  Uhn^]  i^vviS.  S.  renders  freely  and  awkwardly,  be- 
cause the  same  verb  follows  almost  directly  afterwards  again. 
It  is  therefore  a  fair  question  whether  the  original  did  not 
have  Jn-^\q\>  which  is  the  exact  equivalent  of  15^1^^.    Cf.  i  o  i6. 

BBtS^DI  pn]  jUujo  jLcboaoi.  The  plural  signs  may  of  course 
be  due  to  a  copyist. 

11.  ''im  "1£3D  ISDn]  Jba;^K«5  tAxo.  The  versions  have  diffi- 
culties with  this.  GAB  rep  ypajip-aTet  pipXiou  Xoycov  which 
corresponds  to  ''IIT  1SD  *1BD.  Esd.  paraphrases  lib  and 
omits  these  words.  S.  simplifies  by  omitting  "ISDH  either  de- 
liberately or  accidentally. 

^fc<-|tyi-i>j;]  ^l^xml  oil:.  ^^  as  in  7 1,  S.  adds  ^i»  freely. 

12.  «'»Dio  i:t]  JLriSa.  ySjto  j-a\ja.    Cf.  note  on  I  I. 
fc^m  ^BD]  icDQ.Mj  iA£o  IfafiSQ.    S.  adds  Ifsi^o  freely. 

y*Kii]  ya^A.  GAB  J  Esd.,  Vulg.  have  here  all  incorrectly  trans- 
lated. S.  alone  has  preserved  what  the  epistolatory  style 
demands,  viz.  "greeting",  instead  of  MPs  "perfect".  Pro- 
lessor  Bewer  holds  that  the  present  MT  is  a  corruption  of 

4 


so     A  CRITICAL  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  PESHITTA 

what  must  have  stood  here,  viz:  th^.  "Mir  scheint  in  der 
Tat,  in  T'lOi  ein  alter  Fehler  fiir  ubvif  vorzuliegen,  die  erste 
Silbe  D!l  enthalt  noch  einen  Rest  davon,  die  zweite  I**  scheint 
mir  verdorbene  Dittographie  des  folgenden  D1  zu  sein.  Der 
urspriingliche  Text  lautete  also:  ub^  i<"'DB^  n^«.  So  las  auch 
Pesch."' 

W^DI].    S.  omits.    Cf.  note  on  48. 

13.  DytS  D*!^  ''iD]  J-ttoaoj  J^^uBQ  i^jia  M.  S.  renders  freely 
and  pleonastically  to  express  the  formal  style. 

D'?t5^n'«'?].    S.  omits. 

14.  »^bl^  D*7p-p  n  '^np-b]  ittoaoi  \^a»«  l^MA  hi  This  is 
a  repetition  of  vs.  13  where  it  represents  the  Aramaic  ^3^ 

n-^'^ty  sntDj;^  nj;ntyi]  »o-v-  ^  l;j*o.  MT  "and  his  seven 
councillors,  thou  art  sent".  S.  "and  I  have  sent  some  of  my 
courtiers".  S.  does  not  only  put  the  words  in  the  first  person 
in  the  mouth  of  the  king,  as  also  in  vs.  15,  but  omits  T\^2\i^ 
and  misinterprets  the  meaning  of  the  original.  S.,  of  course, 
gives  sense  but  is  in  reality  nothing  but  a  free  and  incor- 
rect translation. 

•^Tl  '•1  "Jinbi^  mn]   y.f*i.a,   ^tiCJ^,  JLmoiai  ^^  ol^Ua^  «I6.     MT 

"according  to  the  law  (HID  must  be  read)  of  thy  God  which 
is  in  thy  hand  (z.  e.  with  thee)".  S.  "and  also  to  inquire 
about  the  law  of  thy  God  which  is  in  thy  hands".  If  S's 
text  is  correctly  handed  down,  the  translator  repeated  for 
the  sake  of  clearness  V*.  «^jjua\.,  misunderstanding  the  mean- 
ing of  the  original.  But  it  is  perhaps  not  quite  impossible 
that  this  repetition  is  due  to  a  copyist  and  that  the  original 
translator  wrote   y*f   instead  of  «lo.    If  he  did,   his  original 

«  Bewer:  "Der  Text  des  Buches  Ezra",  S.  69, 


VERSION  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  EZRA  5 1 

read   HID  which  was  the  original  reading  rather  than  ni2 
of  MT. 
\T1iDJ^"'1].    S.  omits. 

1 5.  minn]  Ka;j»  uxav;  loa^  «  Jil,.  MT  "have  freely  given". 
S.  "which  I  have  voluntarily  offered".  This  is  a  free  trans- 
lation put  into  the  first  person  singular. 

^«-|ty"»  nh»h]  JLv^aoj  liu^al,.  For  the  interchange  in  the  Divine 
name  cf.  15,  38,  9,  622,  10 1,  6,  9.  The  addition  of  libu^a^,  is 
of  no  consequence  for  textual  purposes. 

16.  *)DD  ^D1]  JLAcoa  '^.    S.  omits  the  copula, 
bil]  '^aa  Vaa.   Vaa  is  due  to  dittography. 

«»j;  niminn  nV]  ^ijp  y^^.  MT  "with  the  free  will  offerings 
of  the  people".  S.  "let  go  with  thee".  Cf.  vs.  13.  This  is  a 
very  poor  rendering. 

Siin^l].  S.  freely  adds  JU«!^o  and  understands  ]''minD  to 
refer  to  the  laymen,  translating  it  ^m^  Vjjbali.  ^jj  ^lo  "and 
those  who  wish  to  go  with  thee**,  and  adds  i^fk  *let  them 
go'*,  as  a  result  of  this  faulty  interpretation.  S.  renders  very 
freely  and  quite  incorrectly  from  an  entirely  different  point 
of  view. 

17.  n*'!].   S.  omits. 

18.  nnmi  «SDD]  jioi  j.ftxa^;.  This  is  due  to  the  influence 
of  vs.  17. 

DDn^«]  yoi2^.    S.  translates  with  Ezra  in  mind. 

19.  D^t5^1*T'  nVfc<]  >iX»ioia;  JttiSs..  MT  here  is  quite  unparalleled 
in  Ezra.  S.  presents  here  the  original  D^JiJ^H'"!  '•'7  Nn^«,  so 
also  Esd.,  G.  and  Vulg. 

20.  ^n'?^  n*<n  nints^n  nsti^i]  i^j^y^i^  ^  ^s^iboo,  m»,  um^o 

^Ai:^.  JLiai.   S.  translates  very  freely. 

]mD!?  ij'?  *?D^  n].    S.  omits. 

jnin]  '^llo  cual.  "Thou  Shalt  take  and  give."  The  parallel 
translation  of  the  entire  verse  shows  the  freedom  of  S. 

4* 


52     A  CRITICAL  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  PESHITTA 

MT  S. 

And  whatsoever  other  re-  And  the  rest  of  the  vessels 

quirement    of    the   house   of  which  are   required  by  thee 

thy  God  it  shall  fall  to  thee  for  the  service  of  the  house 

to    give,    thou   shalt   give   it  of  thy  God,  thou  shalt  take, 

from   the  king's  treasury.  and     give     from    the    king's 

treasury. 

21.  fc^n*!  ISD]  JxDoaaj  ;axo  hfAso,     Cf.  VS.  ii   MT. 
'13Vri"»]  vot-a^^-    S.  renders  freely. 

22.  n^  )'»nn  nvi]  ^^  A^*  J"*v*n  l»*^.  As  in  the  fore- 
going in  MT  and  in  S.  the  order  should  be  HUto  'IJ^I  pHS. 
The  order  of  MT  has  been  confused  by  a  scribe. 

23.  ''T^D]  -{■  oX  oaojo  a6M^i  JLo^Aa.  "(Everything)  shall  be 
put  on  a  slip  of  writing'*,  z.  <?.,  it  shall  be  carefully  noted 
down  for  reference,  "and  give  to  him",  i.  e.^  to  Ezra  "(ac- 
cording to  the  precept  of  the  God  of  heaven.") 

«nni«  ^nyn'']  ja:^%  o^*.  MT  "let  it  to  be  done  exactly". 
S.,  "he  shall  take  it  and  use  it".    S.  paraphrases. 

24.  «"'i''ni  ^•'pn  ^•'Ittt]  XI^^m:^  ^•^^.  MT  ^'singers  porters, 
nethinim".  S.  connects  quite  wrongly  «''J^in  with  nyiin  and 
got  the  meaning  "trumpeters"  for  "singers  and  porters". 
The  nethinim  S.  omitted. 

S.  omits  as  previously  (cf.  4  13,  20)  "^Sll  I^S  iTliJD  and  then 
translates  as  if  its  Aramaic  original  read  IDfe^D^  C^K^  »b 
UiVh)^.  This  is  in  reality  merely  a  careless  guess  to  make 
a  smooth  reading  and  to  cover  the  translator's  ignorance  of 
the  preceeding  words. 

25.  «nt3;]  +  l#A«.    Cf.  1 1. 

jitaBtjf]  ^jLato;.    S.  renders  freely. 

TlT]  jjvoMj.    S.  translates  by  a  singular.     The  Greek  vcr- 


VERSION  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  EZRA.  53 

sions   also   have  the  singular  which  Guthe  and  others   be- 
lieve is  the  original  reading.    Vs.  26  favours  the  sing.  =  H'n, 

26.  IB^ItS^^]   JLi**.    S.  paraphrastically  renders  by  the  word 
that  makes  the  natural  antithesis  to  "death". 

27.  n«D]    {10,    l\\».     This    is    a    free    but    good    transla- 
tion. 

115^«].    S.  omits. 

28.  h^h)  V2Jj;V1].    S.  omits. 

niiT  "T^D]  JLf»»;  ttMwtti  «^^^  iooij  llAa^    S.  paraphrases. 


54     A  CRITICAL  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  PESHITTA 


CHAPTER  VIII 

'»t5^«n  n^«1]  JLa^v,  1^;^*  ,^0,0.  S.  adds  freely  after  (and 
these  are)  "the  names  of"  because  a  list  of  names  follows. 

DiTnn«]  >5ta^6ial.  A  scribe  has  carelessly  changed  the  pro- 
nominal ending. 

Dlyn">nni]  ^iKM.U.  S.  renders  MT's  "and  their  genealogy" 
by  "who  were  reckoned  by  genealogy."  This  is  a  free  trans- 
lation. The  following  comparison  of  MT  and  S.  shows  the 
freedom  the  translator  used: 

MT  S. 

Now  these  are  the  chiefs         Now  these  are  t/ie  names 

of   their    fathers    and     their  of  the  chiefs  of  your  fathers 

genealogy,     (viz.)    the     ones  who  were  reckoned  by  genea- 

going    up    with    me   in    the  logy  and  went  up  with  me, 

reign  of  Artaxerxes,  the  king,  in   the  reign  of  Artaxerxes, 

from  Babylon.  the  king,  from  Babylon. 

2.  IDIT'fc^]  pol  for  the  original  poJL.1.  A  scribe  has  written 
the  shorter  form  as  a  result  of  haplography  due  to  the 
similar  ending  of  the  preceding  word. 

3.  *>^nD]  MJisk  ^o. 

4.  1K10  nns]  ola>»  ^^OA.  S*s  usual  way  of  writing  this. 
Cf.  note  on  26. 

)S  •'i^V^n^^W]  »Jl3  iojjk^o  JLJS^.  S.  wrongly  divides  this  name 
into  two  names  ^ii^^  'T'bK  which  necessitates  the  changing 
of  ^  into  **JA. 


VERSION  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  EZRA  55 

5.  b^nn^i-p]  ^liMj  ;^  oj^.  S.  has  just  as  Esd  AB  and  GA 
Zadorjc;  =—  fc^^Ht  which  has  dropped  from  MT,  for  Oj.,^  was 
certainly  olj.  Esd  AB  and  GA  insert  «^ni  after  ""inD,  S.  after 
i<^^D^.    ^luu  is  a  scribal  corruption  of  ^l^uuu. 

6.  ''iiOl]  uia  «  without  the  copula. 

]**^V]  vi*^s».  Cf.  note  on  74  for  a  similar  scribal  error. 
The  original  v'^s^.  or  rather  yo^.^^  has  easily  been  changed 
because  of  the  similarity  of  1  and  ».  The  V  here  has  the  hard 
sound  =  .^  as  in  Gomorrah  «=  HIDV.  S.  follows  a  different 
vocalization  than  that  of  the  Massorites. 

TDV]  ojAi..  •  was  perhaps  originally  the  copula  with  the 
next  word;  in  any  case  it  is  wrong. 

7.  iT'^ny]  JLxjftwi.  S.  presents  again  a  scribe's  confusion  of  ^ 
with  i,  and  of  V  with  a  for  the  original  ;.*^i^. 

8.  nn^t]  Ij^^u  S.  presents  here  a  scribal  confusion  of  »  and 
1  and  ^  and  a. 

9.  bfc^^n'']  ^.»j^uj.  S.  presents  the  easy  confusion  of  j  for  *. 
The  original  of  course  was  V.1ju-..    Cf.  vs.  5. 

10.  n"'BD1''-]n  n''Dl'?t5^]  JUsomi  fa  .laad>u»  .lajo^i^.  The  MT 
has  evidently  lost  a  word.  S.  noticed  this  and  supplied  it 
by  writing  InviNm  twice,  in  this  way  trying  to  make  sense. 
We  know  from  GA  and  Esdras  that  the  missing  word  was 
Paavi  =  '•^5  which  MT  lost  by  haplography.  Uao^aw  is 
due  to  confusion  of  1  and  ^  and  different  vocalization.  MT 
should  read  n''D"l'?tS^  ''in  ^^2Q)  etc. 

n«D]  ^IJbo  so  also  Esd.syr. 

11.  •'m]  «A3.  S.  so  in  each  case  (twice),  Esd.L  GL  have 
pOKxei  =  S. 

12.  n:itj^]  r^^i^  for  original  ^.^a:.!^;  confusion  of  j  and  ;. 
ppT\]  U^i  is  a  copyist's  error  for  ha:^j.   A  scribe  has  con- 
fused -Ji  and  ^. 


$6     A  CRITICAL  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  PESHITTA     - 

n*lfcyj?]  ^fm:^.  This  reading  is  also  found  in  38  Heb.  Mss. 
and  in  Esd.  L 

13.  Dp^il«]  >oaA^;l  for  original  yiOAU}}.  Confusion  of?  and  » 
and  of  **  and  aj. 

hi^))f^]  ^1^  for  original  V»|5».*.     Confusion  of  *  and  *. 

14.  1)^])]  **i))o.  S.  follows  the  ^Ve  of  the  Hebrew  text, 
lisn  Vulg.,  Esd.  LB  also  read  as  S.     This  is  the  original. 

IDJ^I]  >popa^o  so  also  several  Heb.  Mss. 
uy^tif]   ^AJi.     This   is   a   mistake   due   to   the   preceding 
verse. 

15.  nini]  ^ooi.     This  is  a  free  translation. 
i<ini<]  loot.    So  also  vss.  21,  31. 

ItJ^^i^fc^^]  ii^:^,  originally  this  was  ii:^,  so  Thorndyke. 

16.  ]ni^«]  ^h^l  for  original  v^-^^. 
2'^yh]  oA-.  for  original  a^;A.. 
l^l^V]  0^0^  for  original  o^^a«. 

D'li^nfi]  JLjuv  \«oi^  ^o..  S.,  as  the  text  stands,  paraphrases 
by  "these  were  all  of  them  chiefs"  but  the  JLjuv  is  a  mistake 
due  to  the  preceding  Jjuv.  Originally  the  text  read  JLiu^a 
or  lAOfA  which  is  the  exact  equivalent  of  D*'i'»3D. 

D^IS^D^]  >iq\juq^.  This  is  the  usual  Syriac  vocalization  in 
Ezra. 

17.  n«:n«1]  i,A»  =  KVe  of  MT  =  nj3«J.  This  is  preferable 
to  the  K'thib. 

n«]  w;/.  The  mater  lectionis  was  lacking  in  the  translator's  MS. 

I5^«in]  v«eilv;  Ijui    S.  translates  freely. 

n«]  ^j6»  mistake  for  .-W  as  before. 

ITlt^]  s^l,  a  correction  of  the  translator. 

n''i''nin]  ooo.  ^;*,.  S.  renders  MT's  "Nethinim"  by  "those 
who  dwelt",  misunderstanding  it  and  connecting  it  with  the 
late  Heb.  meaning  of  jn3. 

18.  nn^on]  lU^U.    Cf.  note  on  79. 

n^ms^l]  JUfAo.     A  copyist  has  omitted  the  »a  in  A^af*. 


VERSION  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  EZRA  57 

'ia^V  nifilS^  fm^vl.  S.  has  12  for  MT's  18.  This  is  a 
copyist's  error.  S.  usually  agrees  with  MT  in  numbers  much 
closer  than  does  Esd.  but  cf.  note  on  vs.  26  below. 

20.  D'^yni  (twice).  S.  translates  by  Iv-a^^^.  ^"d  by  ^a:v>«m;. 
S.  felt  the  original  force  of  the  word.  We  are  used  to  re- 
gard Nethinim  almost  like  a  name;  but  it  was  merely  the 
designation  of  the  old  temple  slaves. 

D^lfcym]    S.  omits  through  oversight. 
TIIDK^^]  ^oMcii^aAa.    S.  renders  freely. 

21.  D12J  Dt5^]  v^I  IjAso.  The  translator  misunderstood  D1X 
"fast",  and  connected  it  with  HIS  "command".  D  he  took 
as  the  suffix,  and  DB^  he  omitted. 

mty'«]  (jil  was  probably  l^il  originally. 
13Btt5^]  yVfli^N.     The  Syriac  reading  is  here  probably  cor- 
rupt.    The  original  read  yA^t^   or  ^j  a^. 

22.  b'jf]  y^.    S.  renders  freely  MT's  "upon"  by  "with".j 
n^1«fi]    ^^«^->y\s-^.    S.  translates   a    collective   by   a   plural. 

Cf.  vs.  31. 

)ynb»]  \t>C^,  S.  omits  the  suffix  here  but  in  vs.  23  =  MT. 
This  may  perhaps  be  a  scribal  corruption  from  v;**^  as 
vs.  23. 

24.  ""ItJ^]  ujuuuB  is  regarded  by  the  translator  as  an  equi- 
valent, —  a  free  rendering.    Cf  9  2. 

n'lntS^n]  jLxxftA^o.  S.  with  Esd.  AB  preserves  an  original  read- 
ing.   Cf  Bewer  ad  loc. 

25.  n^1pti^«1]  Jbuaa».  S.  freely  renders  MT's  "weighed"  by 
"counted". 

n»nn]  IKa**;.    S.  renders  freely. 
1'»!!lV''*l]  -o(ovU«o,  a  free  translation. 
D'lXSDin]   +   «1  freely. 

26.  DT»"!?V]  S.  renders  freely  by  vqamXx. 

n"»jyDm  ni«ia"ti^tJ^]  ^juoa^o  HJo.    This  is  an  unusual  case  be- 


58     A  CRITICAL  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  PESHITTA 

cause  S.  agrees  with  MT  regarding  numerals  much  better 
than  the  other  versions. 

1DD  n«0  anr  D"«TDDV  n«0  ^DD-^V^I]  S.  (as  Esd.  A)  omits. 

27.  D''iDin«'?]  jioA^Vjo.     S.  translates  b  by  •. 

^IDD]  Im^jb.    S.  freely  renders  '^bowls''  by  "platters." 

Ultit]  i«&a^««j».  S.  translates  freely  *'corinthian"  which  is 
a  synonym  for  precious.    Cf.  I.  Kings  745.    I.  Ch.  297. 

D"«iK^]  S.  omits. 

rmon]  ^i-ta*;.    S.  renders  quite  freely. 

29.  l^ptS^n]  auomIaI.    Cf.  vss.  25,  26,  33. 
niDt!^Sl]  J\jutt»a.    S.  renders  freely. 

30.  S.  adds  \o«iA:^. 

bp\i^t]  j\i>&.»a  >;iaaSju;.    S.  renders  freely. 

31.  n'»"l«]  ^j^-tA'^a.  S.  translates  a  collective  by  a  plural,  as 
in  vs.  22. 

33.  r-hv]  "^  voil  tcJo^/o.    S.  translates  freely, 
nitl'']  «Qtj«aa.    This  is  a  scribe's  error  for  pj*-. 

nn^l^]  JL>wja*  for  original  Ur^^.     A  scribe  has  miscopied. 
•'liD]  ^o^^.    The  translator  mistook  ^lin  for  ^i:in. 

34.  !?pB^»n]  iX^Kjoao.  The  copula  must  be  inserted  in  MT, 
as  Esd.,  G.,  Vulg.,  as  well  as  S.  show. 

35.  "'i^]  uia  ^.    S.  renders  freely. 

n«t3n  •'TB2f]  lo^  ^jasio*:^  Ui^y   Cf  6 17. 

n^y  i>Dn]  llo\s.  ^o^S^  ^p,.  S.  translates  freely  but  well;  the 
original  Heb.  did  of  course  not  read  HI^J?. 

36.  ••m]  lio^^j  =  SidTaypia,  GAB  to  v6\i.i6\ia.  S.  knows 
of  only  one  decree. 

Wt^i]  oQoi  ^feft^aoo.  S.  translates  MT's  "helped"  by  "were 
honoring".  The  translator  misunderstood  the  meaning  (cf.  i  4) 
employed  here  by  MT  thinking  it  signified  "lift  up"  =  honor. 
Esd.  and  G  made  the  same  error. 


VERSION  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  EZRA  59 


CHAPTER  IX 

1.  r\b»]  +  ^*^a. 

D'^'lfcyn]  AiU**.   S.  translates  here  according  to  the  sense. 
!?«nl5>''  Dj;n]  ^Ifm^lj  iaa2w.    S.  translates  as  if  MT  read  DV 
^WltJ^^  but  S.  had  no  different  original  text. 

ni2t1fc<n]    ?KjL»po.     This    is    the    usual   translation   in   Ezra. 

Cf.  33,  92,7. 

DiTTin^nD]  vO'^loM^  -=  DH'Tinj^nn  so  also  G,  and  this  was 
most  probably  the  original  reading. 

••ISffin    ''n«Dn    '':ilDj;n    "DtnNT    it-isn].    S.  has  different  order, 

2.  D^iiDm  D"'Hyn]  iio^jo  Iju**?.  The  translator  here  dis- 
agrees with  MT  which  holds  the  political  officials  guilty. 
The  translator  of  S.  holds  the  religious  leaders  guilty.  This 
is  of  course  only  an  interpretation  by  S.,  who  had  the  same 
text  as  MT.  G  omits  D^'illDm  which  leads  Guthe,  Bertholet 
and  others  to  hold  it  to  be  a  doublet  of  D^lfcS^.  Bewer,  on 
the  other  hand,  upholds  the  MT.  Cf.  ''Der  Text  des  Buches 
Ezrd!^  ad  loc. 

3.  n:in]  -Aoii.  S.  with  Esd.  and  G.  reads  the  plural  n:ia 
which  is  to  be  preferred  to  MT. 

4.  nmn  nin  ^d]  iaa*  v^  v«*^  '•«>•  "^^^i^!  lA-^  '^.  S.  ''all 

who  were  concerned  about  the  word"  (sing.)  The  singular 
l\^jD  ^^^  ==  ^y\l  was  probably  the  original  reading.  It  is 
vouched  for  also  by  Esdras  and  Vulg. 


6o     A  CRITICAL  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  PESHITTA 

n^Wn]  lKi">ft  «ia  oA^N.    S.  renders  freely  but  well. 

T\VTi  nniD^]  ^AsaSifcKX..  S.  renders  paraphrastically,  sub- 
stituting the  time  "ninth  hour"  for  the  ''evening  offering" 
which  was  at  this  time  (3  p.  m.)    Cf.  Acts  3  i. 

5.  yyj^n  nnian]  ,?&»  ^tjiu  iij:^.   Cf.  note  on  vs.  4. 

"'V'^p^]  *?*«o  ^.    S.  renders  freely. 

•'llli]  •.KjuLi  plur,  as  in  vs.  3,  also  here  correct. 

••33  n2^1S«1].    S.  adds  freely  ll«^ja  the  correct  explanation. 

b^]  ^jjB.    S.  shows  a  fine  sense  of  reverence. 

\n'?«]  Id^S^.    S.  omits  the  suffix. 

6.  '^riD^Di'l  ^ni5^n]  ^l6»a.    S.  reads  plural;  MT  sing. 
M^K]  v«^-    S.  reads  plural  and  changes  order  of  words. 
••iB]  ^l  plur.  suffix. 

nh:i  1inoty«1]  J^vo;  ^o^Jto  plur.    S.  freely  adds  ^a^—. 

7.  1ini«].    S.  adds  freely  but  well  ^**aK»l. 
nh^^  nw»2].    S.  plur.  as  in  vs.  6. 

lim  irnilV^I]  ^^o^l  l-oC^^ J.ix>a>S,  ,^^^N  ^^od.  S.  para- 
phrases. 

nt^ni  '']ltyi].    S.  has  the  reverse  order. 

1in3«»].    S.  adds  freely  ^6^lo. 

ni2J1«n  •'D^D  'T'n].  S.  adds  freely  ^xa^A^,  J^JLao.  S.  changes 
the  order  and  paraphrases  freely  in  this  verse. 

8.  J^il  fiJ^lSD]  i9^i  \a:^  ^.    This  is  free  and  good. 
T\)iV>].   S.  omits,  as  does  QB. 

*7n'']  /Kj«;.    S.  translates  freely. 
Unn^l].   S.  omits  suffix. 

9.  1^"«^V  la""!].    S.  adds  voCi^L 

n^HD]  jLiBo-j  ^^miioa.  S.  translates  freely  by  "our  daily  sup- 
port". 

DDH^]  ^pofjo  freely. 
1i^-nn^]  ^  ^Kio  freely. 

10.  no«i].    S.  adds  freely  y*^^. 

nit]  ^tti^  ^o,.    S.  renders  freely,  cf.  91. 


VERSION  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  EZRA  6l 


11.  n'»12l].    S.  adds  suffix  freely 
J^1«].    S.  omits  as  unnecessary  in  the  translation. 
1fi«V]  ^  lpo/«.    S.  renders  freely. 

ni:!J1fc«n  ••DJ;]  /iaL»jjoio  Jbaaa&j,  probably  the  copula  is  due  to 
a  copyist. 

Dn«DtD^]  c»o|Lo  .JUiro  voomv-^^o-    S.  paraphrases. 

12.  ontS^lini]  volijto  \Qilolo.  S.  translates  pleonastically  and 
not  very  differently  from  MT  =  "and  leave  it  for  an  in- 
heritance". 

13.  ^D]  ^«i^  ^o».    Cf.  vs.  I,  10. 

rh^yn  Un»ty«n]  is^vo;  ^c-Jju^o  plur.  as  in  vs.  7. 

ii'»iiV»  ni3D^  nDfcyn]  ^ci.4^  ja^^AM^  ^A^*-  Ka4u.11.  Mt  '*thou 

hast   punished   us    less   than   our  sins  (warrant)".    S.   "thou 
hast  planned  for  us  to  forgive  our  sins".     This  comes  from 
the  reading  flStS^n  for  riDfcS^n  which  9  Heb.  Mss.  have. 
n«t3]  Jjo^a.     S.  renders  freely. 

14.  ISn^  ilt^in]  v^.Axo  ^AB^ill  ^iM.  S.  loses  the  rhetorical 
question  of  MT  rendering,  "Is  it  possible  that  again  we 
shall  trespass"  by  "We  have  turned  away  and  trespassed". 
G  makes  a  similar  error. 

jnnnn^l]  ^-oaj  ^jU.  Again  S.  overlooks  the  question  MT 
"or  marry  people  of  these  abominations"  and  renders  freely 
"and  we  went  and  clung  to  these  unclean  folks";  and  freely 
adds  v«^'p^  r^  vr^**  S-  disregards  the  question  again  and 
presents  here  a  lengthy  paraphrase:  "But  thou  art  merciful. 
Thou  wilt  not  be  angry  with  us.  Forgive  our  transgressions 
from  before  thee.  Because  thou  art  merciful,  leave  us  rem- 
nants in  the  world,  because  there  is  none  like  thee  *  and  may 
we  not  perish." 

S.  paraphrases:  **We  stand  and  confess  before  thee  our  sins." 
TDV^]  JLm  yA»jj»  piJLa^.    S.  paraphrases. 


62     A  CRITICAL  EXAMINATIOK  OF  THE  PESHITTA 


CHAPTER  X 

1.  7Sinfi1  nD2]  i-aa©  {oQf  JLsoi.    S.  changes  the  word  order. 

n^nbt^n]  u^n.   Cf.  15,  38,  9,  622,  715. 

ayn  Dn]  JL^  Qoot  ^jiAa.  S.  renders  instead  of  "the  people 
wept";  "the  children  were  weeping". 

HDn  nnin]  o^,  i^i  u^.  cf.  1 1. 

2.  ^fc^Tl^]  V»jLjuui  is  a  scribal  confusion  of  i  for  *.  The  ori- 
ginal was  V»U^. 

rh))f]  yi>ux  -=  MT  K're  D^"'3?. 
«irj;'?]  +  IfAxo.    Cf.  note  on  1 1. 

ii^n^«n]  v?«>5^  i^iMA.  Cf.  vs.  I. 

3.  liTlbw'?  n^'in-mDi]  v^^iSs  yijj*  t&oo<u.  i»K  S.  translates  freely 
MT's  "let  us  make  a  covenant  with  our  God"  by  "let  us  say 
oaths  before  our  God". 

D''t5^i]  ?iotAOj  jiu.  MT  is  obviously  incorrect  as  only  the 
foreign  wives  were  meant.  GAEL  support  the  reading  of  S., 
accordingly  we  should  emend  MT  to  read  D^'K^J  m^lpSn.  It 
is  possible  that  the  translator  has  used  his  prerogative  of 
making  clear  what  was  meant  and  that  the  original  text  read 
D'^B^^n  or  li^tS^i.  Professor  Bewer  (ad  loc)  adopts  the  latter 
on  the  ground  that  "Die  Einfiigung  lasst  sich  leicht,  die  Aus- 
lassung  schwer  erklaren". 

mj;n]  Ui^  y^U  =  mVD.  So  also  GAB  and  many  oriental 
Heb.  mss.     This  is  the  correct  reading;  the  interchange  of 


VERSION  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  EZRA  63 

1  and  D  was  easily  made  in  the  Heb.  MT  must  be  accord- 
ingly mended. 

nb'JJ.''.]  jAi..  MT  "let  it  he  done".  S.  ''do".  S.  connects 
the  following  Dip  cf.  vs.  4  with  this  imperative  *»?•  "and  con- 
firm'*.   MT  is  better. 

4.  Il^in  yh)f]  hot  Ij»xa»  AJunA  oot  yA^.  S.  paraphrases  "(for) 
on  thy  account  this  decision  has  been  decided". 

1ini«1]  ^AA*5  ^^jo.  J  ^l^jo  is  repeated  because  of  the  foregoing 
paraphrase. 

«1tj;]  +  ';*«•    Cf.  note  on  11,  102. 

5.  "•'ifcy]  tuLiMA.  This  is  S*s  usual  paraphrase  of  this  word. 
Cf.  824,  91. 

D-il^n  D'^in^n]  JLa\.o  li»^.  S.  reads  the  copula  with  GAEL 
and  Esd.     This  is   obviously  the  original  reading  =  O'linDH 

"nilD]  ]l«j»«A  ^l  S.  brings  out  the  specific  sense  of  li^D 
here. 

6.  ^ntj;]  4-  liAm.    As  in  vss.  2  and  5. 
DSn^Kn]  i.-poj.    As  in  vs.  i. 

riDtJ^^]  N^mal.    S.  reads  pi. 

l''U^^^fe<]  "ftju^is..  S.  is  the  result  of  scribal  carelessness  which 
changed  ojul^  into  ^sjuii^  by  miscopying  the  o.  Esd.  AB 
and  GAB  vouch  for  the  originality  of  MT. 

•J^'^l]  oi^6  =  )^J1.  A  scribe  has  carelessly  written  *]  for  J 
in  MT.    S.  preserved  the  original  reading.    Cf.  Esd. 

n^lirr]  A-aa^?.    S.  paraphrases. 

7.  h)p  IT^V'']  i^^^  •fJ"*.  S.  freely  and  correctly  para- 
phrases MT's  "they  made  proclamations"  by  "and  the  priests 
proclaimed". 

D^tS^11'"1]  >i\*;oJLao.  S.  here  has  preserved  the  original  which 
is  vouched  for  by  many  Heb.  Mss.  also  by  G.  The  con- 
text also  demands  it  in  agreement  with  the  previous  "in 
Judea". 


64     A  CRITICAL  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  PESHITTA 

b^b]  Vdao.  Again  S.  construes  as  in  the  foregoing  and 
reads  "and  among  all  the  captives."  In  MT  the  proclama- 
tion is  to  the  exiles  alone;  S.  has  it  to  all  the  province  of 
Judea,  to  the  capital  and  to  the  exiles. 

nb^)^'^]  +  Ih^r^^.    Cf.  note  on  i  i. 

8.  myD]  +  «*S-  Uoa.    S.  renders  freely. 

D'»iptni  D"'1fcJ^n]  Jkavoijo  iiuAjB;.    S.  has  a  different  order, 
n^l^n  bnpt]  \a\ijn^U  IM^  ^.    S.  interprets.    Cf.  vs.  6. 

9.  ty*in  «in]  U^y^,    S.  renders  freely. 

D''*lfcJ^5^2]  11,- ms^.    This  is  due  to  a  scribe's  carelessness. 

Uty]  Qjua.    S.  renders  freely. 

n**^  Sinii].    S.  omits  through  oversight. 

w^nb^n]  i-*jD.   Cf.  vs.  I. 

D''ttty:infi1  nn^n-^y  D''T'J?1D]  ?KSj»  %:^  ^K-1;o  ,fi-.j«.  "Quaking 
and  shivering  because  of  the  matter."  S.  either  translated 
pleonastically  D"'TV^D  (cf.  vs.  12)  and  omits  D'^Dty^Httl  (cf.  vs.  12) 
or  took  the  latter  wrongly  for  D''t5^J?iD1. 

10.  Dn^VD]  +  l6^.JLa.    Cf.  vs.  2. 

nttty«]  J  IfH^.    S.  reads  plur.  as  usual. 

12.  bT\p]  jjox.    S.  interprets  as  in  vss.  6  and  8. 
)M^»'')]  +  Uv:^.    Cf.  note  on   I  i. 

nityj;^  1i'«*?j;  ?I''inD  p].  If  S.  is  not  simply  a  free  para- 
phrase, its  present  text  may  contain  a  doublet  of  which  the 
original  ^e"!^:^  y^^ii^Jb^  v^a*  "thy  words  to  us"  was  /aUr  cor- 
rected by  Ur^rJ^  ,r%\y^\.  ^^Jii.  hal  fsoN  >Bjjfa^  ^^.r^jiwe  ''and  ac- 
ceptable is  everything  which  thou  tellest  us  to  do  in  truth". 
Perhaps  the  second  translation  (correction)  was  written  on 
the  margin  and  a  later  scribe  incorporated  it  into  the  text. 
We  may  still  further  ask,  was  lU-^r^  still  another  translation 
of  p? 

13.  b^H]  ^2  ^^'    S.  translates  freely. 
HD  Y»]  -f-  ^.    S.  translates  freely. 

14.  bnpn'b^b]  Jb»x  et^o.    S.  did  not  represent  the  meaning 


VERSION  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  EZRA  65 

of  the  original  correctly  according  to  which  the  leaders 
were  to  represent  the  whole  congregation  in  this  matter. 
On  Jba^  cf.  vs.  12. 

D-i»tD  U^nvh]  /I0I.J,  hr^.  S.  here  misinterprets  "the  ap- 
pointed times"  by  "the  time  of  prayer". 

^fe^  jnn]  ttjKjoja.  S.  uses  one  term  for  the  two  Hebrew 
words. 

ntn  "^y^h  *7J^]  {««  iJbooow  ^^4^.  MT  is  evidently  wrong  and 
must  be  corrected  here  to  ntn  ^^ITi  b)^.  Two  Heb.  Mss. 
GAB  Vulg.  read  b)^.  It  is  true  that  S.  paraphrases  in  Ih^iiM 
but  has  the  exact  sense,  and  may  therefore  be  regarded  as 
a  witness  of  the  true  text. 

15.  ^«nlyv]  Vlauai..  This  is  a  copyist's  carelessness  for 
the  original  ^JLm^.  Cf.  v.  6  for  a  similar  mistake  in  the 
Syriac. 

rT'tn^]  JLjuu.     This  is  a  scribal  error  for  Jbiuu. 
>»X«»o].     A  copyist  has  misplaced  this  name. 

n»rbv]  };qi  ^^^^  V*.  =  ntn  imn  by.  Cf.  note  on  1 1. 

Tl^ty]  wKao.  This  is  a  confusion  of  ^  (written  here  vfio)  and  yi 
(cf.  first  word  in  this  verse  where  a  similar  error  occurs  and 
also  vs.  6)  with  the  omission  of  o. 

DltJJ]  voo($ot:w.  S.  points  the  Heb.  differently  and  renders 
here  "(was)  their  helper",  the  subject  is  Shabbethai,  the 
Levite.  In  MT  Meshullam,  who  is  misplaced  in  S.,  was  also 
the  subject,  "they  helped  them". 

16.  lV*l^"'1]  «^Q.  S.  with  GL  Kal  SieoretXev  gives  evidence 
of  an  original  ^'l^'l  which  MT  also  demands  in  that  Ezra 
alone  is  subject.     MT  must  here  be  corrected. 

D'»K^i«]  +  ^-fmjw.    S.  freely  adds  ^f«fti^. 

niOB^l]  +  o-fAll.  S.  has  a  free  addition  to  bring  out  the 
meaning. 

^1^11^]  «^  •♦^^BofB^  =  ^yf?,  This  is  the  correct  reading. 
MT  must  accordingly  be  corrected. 

S 


66     A  CRITICAL  EXAMINATION   OF  THE  PESHITTA 

17.  D-itfi^iS  tan]  »vA^  voo^^  =  D'»t5^i«n  tan.  This  is  the  cor- 
rect reading.    MT  must  be  accordingly  corrected. 

18.  n'»'T'1]  Ajja.0.  The  translator  read  the  fuller  from  M'^l''  = 
ct*p*^  which  a  scribe  corrupted  into  0,40^. 

19.  DT'  liTY'l]  ^^oi  «l  omAiL^llo.  S.  renders  freely  "and  they 
also  consented". 

D'«OtS^«l]  ai»fj».    S.  omits  n''J0ty«1  and  supplies  "they  offered" 
in  order  to  make  sense.    Cf.  RV.  which  reads  both. 
)«ri»*'«]  iJi^,  ^f^J.    S.  has  the  plural. 

20.  1)0«]  '^\,    Cf.  2  59. 

rriint]  Ur^).  S.  reads  with  9  Hebrew  Mss.  that  which  may 
have  been  the  original.  The  confusion  is  as  easily  explained 
in  Hebrew  as  in  Syriac. 

21.  ^^Tl'']  V»Jua*.  This  is  a  scribal  corruption  of  the  ori- 
ginal ^JLuuu. 

22.  ••i^Vl^^fc^]  ^A»'-  In  vs.  27,  S.  has  >^jjyuk:Sv  which  shows 
that  the  original  was  mjl^o^  in  vs.  27  and  <A:>.a*^  here. 

^i^V'!^'^'']  ^^>^i-*»*«-     This  is  an  error  for  V»Jlxbf«uuo. 

!?Nini]  "^Ui*^.  S.  gives  here  the  other  common  form  of 
this  name. 

*intV]  faja^.  This  is  due  to  an  exchange  of  ;  and  4  for 
the  original  t^jo*. 

23.  inti'']  ^joa.  This  is  due  to  a  scribe's  carelessly  writ- 
ing j>  for  *  and  \  for  ?. 

»lD'''?p  «"in  n^'^pl]  14^0  Xi^,  S.  interprets  the  names  as 
belonging  to  two  distinct  individuals;  but  this  is  due  to  the 
carelessness  of  a  scribe  who  wrote  o  for  00,.  iji\*  shows  the 
confusion  of  j  for  >. 

24.  Dnnt5^»n]   jiJba*Jo  =  aTlltS^DH.     Cf.   2  41. 

n'«B^"»^«]  >i.*-S^.  This  is  the  result  of  careless  copying.  The 
toriginal  was  «rM«»\\.  A  scribe  changed  «  and  ^  to  ^.  Cf. 
he  same  error  in  vs.  6. 


VERSION  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  EZRA  6^ 

xh^l  ftSftAA.  This  is  due  to  the  absence  of  mater  lectionis 
in  MT;  the  final  o  is  a  dittography  of  the  following  copula. 

""UN]  ^t%\.  This  is  due  to  an  interchange  of  ?  and  j  for 
the  original  -io^ 

25.  iTT^]  Ujku,     The  i  is  dittography  for  *, 

p"'J!D]  ^jooAxa.  A  careless  scribe  has  written  a  more  com- 
mon name  which  resembled  closely  the  one  he  found  in  his 
text. 

^X^h)K\  f-iii^..     This  is  for  the  original  iisSs.  or  ?i:k-A. 

26.  rT'inD]  XaiKj.  The  aural  confusion  here  is  due  to  both 
names  being  so  common  and  thus  easy  to  confuse. 

7i<^)f]  V»JL^i.  This  is  a  corruption  of  the  original  V»Jjuu.> 
or  V»JLju-.  by  a  confusion  of  1  and  >  and  of  :»-  and  m. 

Tth)K\  oopi^.  This  form  is  due  to  the  following  copula 
which  S.  connects  with  the  fuller  form  of  the  name  "irf^^. 

27.  «int]  J-»M-  The  seiame  points  are,  of  course,  a  scribal 
error,  due,  perhaps,  to  a  thoughtless  connection  with  "olive 
trees".  The  mistaken  pronunciation  again  may  come  from 
the  name  «ri\T  =  IK-j. 

"'i5;i''^fc^]  »**jtiuSs..  This  is  for  the  original  ua^oa:^.  Cf.  note 
on  vs.  22  also  8  4. 

2''tJ^''7fc^]  «^*.i2^.  Mater  lectionis  was  wanting  in  Ms.  used 
by  translator. 

iT'inD]  UiKj.    Cf  vs.  26. 

IDt]  ioaj.  This  is  due  to  an  interchange  of  »  and  \  and 
to  a  different  vocalization. 

>^\^^y[\  U)^.  This  is  a  copyist's  corruption  of  the  original 
luj*^  due  to  the  more  common  but  different  name. 

29.  ""in]  ^caa.  S.  reads  as  does  one  Heb.  Ms.  Confusion 
of  A  and  A. 

D7tyD]  yioliAl  ^.  This  may  be  due  to  a  careless  copyist 
rather  than  to  the  translator. 

5* 


68     A  CRITICAL  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  PESHITTA 

nnj?]  U)^^.  S.  reads  as  does  one  Heb.  Ms.  Confusion 
of  I  and  ;.    Cf.  v.  28. 

nity*]  *^Aa-.    This  is  a  scribe's  careless  copying. 

^St5^]  ^ojL».  S.  supplied  the  more  common  pronouncia- 
tion. 

30.  riHB]  ^^oib.    S.  always  so  translates  in  Ezra. 

«i1j;]  iA.f^.  The  ^  is  a  mistake  1  and  the  .^  is  a 
mistake  for  i^..  Note  how  a  good  common  name  results  from 
these  mistakes. 

nrnQ)  ''lim]  Ui*  via  -cSiao  ==  r\mQ  •'in  V^ni.  The  trans- 
lator missed  the  word  and  by  the  interchange  of  ^  and  )  has 
changed  the  name  "Binnui"  into  "his  sons". 

31.  D1PI  '•ini]  yirjy  uia  ^.  S.  and  GAB  also  many  Heb.  Mss. 
have  here  the  original  reading.  MT  must  be  corrected  to 
read  ''i?pv  GAB  Esd.  ABL  all  vocalize  nnn  as  S.  does.  MT  = 
D"in  which  must  also  be  corrected  to  Din. 

n"'D'?D  iT'tS^'']  ?«jul  ik-^yt.  S.  has  here  a  different  order.  S. 
read  originally  l^jul  for  l**i^ 

32.  iT'lDB^]  J«svi».  A  copyist  mistook  this  for  the  more 
common  name. 

33.  nrinD]  ^K^M.    S.  vocalizes  differently. 

*I3t]  i^f.    S.  again  confuses  »  and  j  and  :a  and  j>. 
^d"»]  uAfAo.    This  is  a  copyist's  error  for  mm^o.     A  scribe 
has  confused  *  and  a  and  *  and  4. 

34.  ""in]  MAa.  Cf.  vs.  29  where  the  "sons  of  Bani"  are  al- 
ready listed.  S.  must  be  correct  as  one  clan  would  not  be 
listed  twice.  At  least  one  is  wrong  either  in  vs.  29  or  here. 
MT  should  therefore  probably  be  corrected  to  S.  =  "'311. 

^nyiD]  w^cLM.     This  is  due  to  a  different  vocalization. 
bt^)»]  ^»a*  =  ^«1^  to  which  Esd.  ABL  and  GBL  also  testify. 
Cf.  Bewer  ad  loc.    MT  must  be  accordingly  corrected. 

35.  nnn]  fa.  A  copyist  read  \  for  ?  and  this  led  to  the 
omission  of  ir",  hence  r*. 


VERSION  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  EZRA  69 

\ni^D,  K*re  )Tl)h^]  ott^A^  =  liT'^D  which  may  have  preserved 
the  original  reading. 

36.  rCil]  ^foMO.  MT  is  corrupt;  but  S.  does  not  seem  to 
have  preserved  the  correct  reading. 

n'»B^"'^«]  <uuSi<.  Cf.  vs.  27. 

37.  1fcyj;"'1,  I^'re  •'lyj?'''!]  -1<^.  S.  in  its  corrupted  state  seems 
to  have  followed  I^'re  and  to  have  read  originally  -.m^. 
(Cf.  note  on  vs.  36).    opb  was  corrupted  to  U. 

38.  ''lill  ''ill]  ^oiaJL2k  UAA9.  This  is  a  scribal  corruption  for 
the  original  -aia  uiiao,  i.  e.,  the  second  without  o»  =  "and 
the  sons  of  Binnui,"  so  also  G.  MT  must  be  accordingly 
corrected. 

39.  n^iy]  JL.;ck-.  Cf.  vs.  29.  A  scribe  mistook  it  for  the 
common  name,  an  aural  error.  1  softly  and  badly  spoken 
sounded  like  t.  Cf.  Heb.  ItJ^  and  Syr.  »f^  and  the  French 
pronunciation  of  the  English  ik. 

40.  ••miDO]  cku^.  This  is  for  .^t.^^.  But  both  MT  and  S. 
are  corrupt. 

•"ItS^]  -fXD.     The  translator  read  t5^  for  ^, 

41.  ^fc5"1tj^]  V>{;f^.  This  is  a  corruption  for  the  original 
V.hi^  in  its  Syriac  form. 

in^Dbti^l].    S.  omits. 

43.  hi^y^]  ^{o^.  This  is  a  copyist's  mistake  for  the  ori- 
ginal V»^ax*. 

nTiniD]  {K^Kmq.    Cf.  note  in  vs.  33. 

i:i\]  ioDjo.    Cf.  vs.  27.    S.  reads  with  i  Heb.  Ms. 

)ri   S.  omits. 

44.  '•«t5>i]  oa^ni  =  K're  )»\^i. 

)Q^m  D'«l5^i]  oj^i-ofj  Uil.  MT  here  is  corrupt.  S.  read  the 
same  text  and  tries  to  express  the  meaning  by  "and  there 
were  among  them  men  who  had  begotten  sons*'. 


VITA 

I,  Charles  Arthur  Hawley,  was  born  December  3,  1889 
at  Verona,  New  York,  the  son  of  Charles  Andrew  and  Clara 
Elizabeth  Hawley  (nee  Russell).  I  graduated  from  the  Verona 
High  School  in  1908.  The  next  four  years  I  taught  in  the 
public  schools  of  the  State  of  New  York.  In  191 2  I  matri- 
culated at  Hamilton  College  from  which  I  graduated  in  1916 
with  the  degree  of  B.  A.  cum  laude.  In  the  fall  of  the  same 
year  I  entered  Union  Theological  Seminary,  New  York  City. 
In  February  19 17  I  matriculated  at  Columbia  University  as 
graduate  student  in  the  Department  of  Semitics  under  Pro- 
fessor Richard  J.  H.  Gottheil.  In  1919  I  graduated  from 
Union  Theological  Seminary  with  the  degree  of  B.  D.  magna 
cum  laude.  The  following  year  I  continued  my  study  at 
Union  Theological  Seminary  as  Fellow  of  the  Seminary  and 
in  1920  received  the  degree  of  S.  T.  M.  magna  cum  laude. 
In  the  fall  of  1920  I  matriculated  at  the  University  of  Basel 
carrying  on  my  studies  under  Professors  Bernhard  Duhm, 
Friedrich  Schuhhess,  Albrecht  Alt,  and  Paul  Wernle.  The 
summer  semester  of  1922  I  spent  at  the  University  of 
Halle- Wittenberg  in  study  under  Professors  Brockelmann, 
Bauer,  Eissfeldt,  Feine,  von  Dobschiitz  and  Dr.  Hempel. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY, 
BERKELEY 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 

*  ♦.    :     STAMPED  BELOW 

^         •  •   t 

Books  not  returned  on  time  are  subject  to  a  fine  of 
50c  per  volume  after  the  third  day  overdue,  increasing 
to  $1.00  per  volume  after  the  sixth  day.  Books  not  in 
demand  may  be  renewed  if  application  is  made  before 
expiration  of  loan  period. 


JUL  15 1*27 


28re{)t63}R 


*-'£> 


^iT^ 


to 


^SJ963 


MAY    3197$ 

REC.  cia,   MAY  8 


YC 101024 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


